Back to GetFilings.com

U.S. SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Washington, DC 20549

FORM 10-K

(MARK ONE)

FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 31, 2003.

FOR THE TRANSITION PERIOD FROM              TO             .

Commission file number: 33-27312

LAKELAND BANCORP, INC.

(Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)

Registrant’s telephone number, including area code: (973)697-2000

Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act: None

Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(g) of the Act:

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant (1) has filed all reports required to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to file such reports), and (2) has been subject to such filing requirements for the past 90 days. Yes x No ¨

Indicate by check mark if disclosure of delinquent filers pursuant to Item 405 of Regulation S-K is not contained herein, and will not be contained, to the best of Registrant’s knowledge, in definitive proxy or information statements incorporated by reference in Part III of this Form 10-K or any amendment to this Form 10-K. ¨

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is an accelerated filer (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Act.) Yes x No ¨

The aggregate market value of the voting stock of the registrant held by non-affiliates (for this purpose, persons and entities other than executive officers, directors, and 5% or more shareholders) of the registrant, as of the last business day of the registrant’s most recently completed second fiscal quarter (June 30, 2003), is estimated to have been approximately $226,000,000.

The number of shares outstanding of the registrant’s Common Stock, as of February 1, 2004, was 15,957,046.

DOCUMENTS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE:

Lakeland Bancorp, Inc.’s Proxy Statement for its 2004 Annual Meeting of Shareholders (Part III).

LAKELAND BANCORP, INC.

Form 10-K Index

-i-

PART I

ITEM 1 - Business

GENERAL

Lakeland Bancorp, Inc. (the “Company”), a New Jersey corporation, is a bank holding company registered with and supervised by the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (the “Federal Reserve Board”). The Company was organized in March of 1989 and commenced operations on May 19, 1989, upon consummation of the acquisition of all of the outstanding stock of Lakeland Bank, formerly named Lakeland State Bank (“Lakeland”). On February 20, 1998, the Company acquired Metropolitan State Bank, which became a subsidiary of the Company. On July 15, 1999, the Company completed its acquisition of The National Bank of Sussex County (“NBSC”). On January 28, 2000, the Company merged Metropolitan State Bank into Lakeland, with Lakeland as the survivor. On June 29, 2001, the Company merged NBSC into Lakeland, with Lakeland as the survivor. On August 25, 2003, the Company acquired CSB Financial Corp. and its subsidiary, Community State Bank, by merging CSB Financial Corp. into the Company and Community State Bank into Lakeland, with Lakeland as the survivor. On October 27, 2003, the Company announced the execution of a definitive agreement providing that Newton Financial Corporation (“Newton”) would be merged into the Company. As a result of the merger, Newton Trust Company, a subsidiary of Newton, will become a subsidiary of the Company. Thus, after the merger, the Company’s banking business will be conducted by Lakeland and Newton Trust Company. Under the terms of the agreement with Newton, Newton Trust Company will operate as an independent bank for a two-year period following the closing, after which it will be merged into Lakeland. The merger has been approved by the shareholders of the Company and Newton. Consummation of the merger remains subject to the receipt of regulatory approvals and the satisfaction of other conditions. See footnote 2 of the notes to the Company’s consolidated financial statements included in this Annual Report on Form 10-K.

The Company’s primary business currently consists of managing and supervising Lakeland. The principal source of the Company’s income is dividends paid by Lakeland. At December 31, 2003, the Company had consolidated total assets, deposits, and stockholders’ equity of approximately $1.6 billion, $1.3 billion, and $111.0 million, respectively.

This Annual Report on Form 10-K contains certain forward-looking statements within the meaning of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995 (“Forward-Looking Statements”). Such statements are subject to risks and uncertainties that could cause actual results to differ materially from those projected in such Forward-Looking Statements. Certain factors which could materially affect such results and the future performance of the Company are described in Exhibit 99.1 to this Annual Report on Form 10-K.

Lakeland was organized as Lakeland State Bank on May 19, 1969. Lakeland is a state banking association, the deposits of which are insured by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (“FDIC”). Lakeland is not a member of the Federal Reserve System. Lakeland is a full-service commercial bank, offering a complete range of consumer and commercial services. Lakeland’s 38 branch offices are located in the following five New Jersey counties: Morris, Passaic, Sussex, Essex, and Bergen.

Commercial Bank Services

Through Lakeland, the Company offers a broad range of lending, depository, and related financial services to individuals and small to medium sized businesses in its northern New Jersey market area. In the lending area, these services include short and medium term loans, lines of credit, letters of credit, inventory and accounts receivable financing, real estate construction loans and mortgage loans. Depository products include demand deposits, savings accounts, and time accounts. In addition, the Company offers collection, wire transfer, and night depository services. In the second quarter of 2000, Lakeland acquired NIA National Leasing Inc. Since its acquisition, this company has operated as a division of Lakeland under the name Lakeland Bank Equipment Leasing Division. This division provides a solution to small and medium sized companies who prefer to lease equipment over other financial alternatives.

Consumer Banking

The Company also offers a broad range of consumer banking services, including checking accounts, savings accounts, NOW accounts, money market accounts, certificates of deposit, secured and unsecured loans, consumer installment loans, mortgage loans, and safe deposit services.

Other Services

Full-service investment and advisory services for individuals are available through a third party.

-1-

Competition

The Company operates in a highly competitive market environment within northern New Jersey. Three major multi-bank holding companies in addition to several large independent regional banks and several large multi-state thrift holding companies operate within the Company’s market area. Lakeland offers comparable deposit products and lending services to those offered by its larger competitors.

In recent years, the financial services industry has expanded rapidly as barriers to competition within the industry have become less significant. Within this industry, banks must compete not only with other banks and traditional financial institutions, but also with other business corporations that have begun to deliver financial services.

Concentration

The Company is not dependent for deposits or exposed by loan concentrations to a single customer or a small group of customers the loss of any one or more of which would have a material adverse effect upon the financial condition of the Company.

Employees

At December 31, 2003, there were 502 persons employed by the Company.

SUPERVISION AND REGULATION

General

The Company is a registered bank holding company under the federal Bank Holding Company Act of 1956, as amended (the “Holding Company Act”), and is required to file with the Federal Reserve Board an annual report and such additional information as the Federal Reserve Board may require pursuant to the Holding Company Act. The Company is subject to examination by the Federal Reserve Board.

Lakeland is a state chartered banking association subject to supervision and examination by the Department of Banking and Insurance of the State of New Jersey and the FDIC. The regulations of the State of New Jersey and FDIC govern most aspects of Lakeland’s business, including reserves against deposits, loans, investments, mergers and acquisitions, borrowings, dividends, and location of branch offices. Lakeland is subject to certain restrictions imposed by law on, among other things, (i) the maximum amount of obligations of any one person or entity which may be outstanding at any one time, (ii) investments in stock or other securities of the Company or any subsidiary of the Company, and (iii) the taking of such stock or securities as collateral for loans to any borrower.

The Holding Company Act

The Holding Company Act limits the activities which may be engaged in by the Company and its subsidiaries to those of banking, the ownership and acquisition of assets and securities of banking organizations, and the management of banking organizations, and to certain non-banking activities which the Federal Reserve Board finds, by order or regulation, to be so closely related to banking or managing or controlling a bank as to be a proper incident thereto. The Federal Reserve Board is empowered to differentiate between activities by a bank holding company or a subsidiary thereof and activities commenced by acquisition of a going concern.

With respect to non-banking activities, the Federal Reserve Board has by regulation determined that several non-banking activities are closely related to banking within the meaning of the Holding Company Act and thus may be performed by bank holding companies. Although the Company’s management periodically reviews other avenues of business opportunities that are included in that regulation, the Company has no present plans to engage in any of these activities other than providing brokerage services through a third party.

With respect to the acquisition of banking organizations, the Company is required to obtain the prior approval of the Federal Reserve Board before it may, by merger, purchase or otherwise, directly or indirectly acquire all or substantially all of the assets of any bank or bank holding company, if, after such acquisition, it will own or control more than 5% of the voting shares of such bank or bank holding company.

-2-

Regulation of Bank Subsidiaries

There are various legal limitations, including Sections 23A and 23B of the Federal Reserve Act, which govern the extent to which a bank subsidiary may finance or otherwise supply funds to its holding company or its holding company’s non-bank subsidiaries. Under federal law, no bank subsidiary may, subject to certain limited exceptions, make loans or extensions of credit to, or investments in the securities of, its parent or the non-bank subsidiaries of its parent (other than direct subsidiaries of such bank which are not financial subsidiaries) or take their securities as collateral for loans to any borrower. Each bank subsidiary is also subject to collateral security requirements for any loans or extensions of credit permitted by such exceptions.

Commitments to Affiliated Institutions

The policy of the Federal Reserve Board provides that a bank holding company is expected to act as a source of financial strength to its subsidiary banks and to commit resources to support such subsidiary banks in circumstances in which it might not do so absent such policy.

Interstate Banking

The Riegle-Neal Interstate Banking and Branching Efficiency Act of 1994 permits bank holding companies to acquire banks in states other than their home state, regardless of applicable state law. This act also authorizes banks to merge across state lines, thereby creating interstate branches. Under the act, each state had the opportunity either to “opt out” of this provision, thereby prohibiting interstate branching in such state, or to “opt in”. A state may “opt in” with respect to de novo branching, thereby permitting a bank to open new branches in a state in which the bank does not already have a branch. Without de novo branching, an out-of-state bank can enter the state only by acquiring an existing bank. New Jersey enacted legislation to authorize interstate banking and branching and the entry into New Jersey of foreign country banks. New Jersey did not authorize de novo branching into the state. However, under federal law, federal savings banks which meet certain conditions may branch de novo into a state, regardless of state law.

Gramm-Leach Bliley Act of 1999

The Gramm-Leach-Bliley Financial Modernization Act of 1999 became effective in early 2000. The Modernization Act:

The Modernization Act also modified other financial laws, including laws related to financial privacy and community reinvestment.

The USA PATRIOT Act

In response to the events of September 11, 2001, the Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism Act of 2001 (the “USA PATRIOT Act”), was signed into law on October 26, 2001. The USA PATRIOT Act gives the federal government new powers to address terrorist threats through enhanced domestic security measures, expanded surveillance powers, increased information sharing, and broadened anti-money laundering requirements. By way of amendments to the Bank Secrecy Act, Title III of the USA PATRIOT Act encourages information sharing among bank regulatory agencies and law enforcement bodies. Further, certain provisions of Title III impose affirmative obligations on a broad range of financial institutions, including banks, thrifts, brokers, dealers, credit unions, money transfer agents and parties registered under the Commodity Exchange Act.

Among other requirements, Title III of the USA PATRIOT Act imposes the following requirements with respect to financial institutions:

-3-

(i) internal policies, procedures, and controls; (ii) specific designation of an anti-money laundering compliance officer; (iii) ongoing employee training programs; and (iv) an independent audit function to test the anti-money laundering program.

The federal banking agencies have begun to propose and implement regulations pursuant to the USA PATRIOT Act. These proposed and interim regulations would require financial institutions to adopt the policies and procedures contemplated by the USA PATRIOT Act.

Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

On July 30, 2002, President Bush signed into law the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, or the SOA. The stated goals of the SOA are to increase corporate responsibility, to provide for enhanced penalties for accounting and auditing improprieties at publicly traded companies and to protect investors by improving the accuracy and reliability of corporate disclosures pursuant to the securities laws.

The SOA generally applies to all companies, both U.S. and non-U.S., that file or are required to file periodic reports with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “SEC”) under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, or the Exchange Act. Given the extensive SEC role in implementing rules relating to many of the SOA’s new requirements, the final scope of these requirements remains to be determined.

The SOA includes very specific additional disclosure requirements and new corporate governance rules, requires the SEC and securities exchanges to adopt extensive additional disclosure, corporate governance and other related rules and mandates further studies of certain issues by the SEC and the Comptroller General. The SOA represents significant federal involvement in matters traditionally left to state regulatory systems, such as the regulation of the accounting profession, and to state corporate law, such as the relationship between a board of directors and management and between a board of directors and its committees.

The SOA addresses, among other matters:

-4-

The SEC has enacted various rules to implement various provisions of the SOA with respect to, among other matters, disclosure in periodic filings pursuant to the Exchange Act.

Regulation W

Transactions between a bank and its “affiliates” are quantitatively and qualitatively restricted under the Federal Reserve Act. The Federal Deposit Insurance Act applies Sections 23A and 23B to insured nonmember banks in the same manner and to the same extent as if they were members of the Federal Reserve System. The Federal Reserve Board has also issued Regulation W, which codifies prior regulations under Sections 23A and 23B of the Federal Reserve Act and interpretative guidance with respect to affiliate transactions. Regulation W incorporates the exemption from the affiliate transaction rules but expands the exemption to cover the purchase of any type of loan or extension of credit from an affiliate. Affiliates of a bank include, among other entities, the bank’s holding company and companies that are under common control with the bank. The Company is considered to be an affiliate of Lakeland. In general, subject to certain specified exemptions, a bank or its subsidiaries are limited in their ability to engage in “covered transactions” with affiliates:

In addition, a bank and its subsidiaries may engage in covered transactions and other specified transactions only on terms and under circumstances that are substantially the same, or at least as favorable to the bank or its subsidiary, as those prevailing at the time for comparable transactions with nonaffiliated companies. A “covered transaction” includes:

In addition, under Regulation W:

-5-

Regulation W generally excludes all non-bank and non-savings association subsidiaries of banks from treatment as affiliates, except to the extent that the Federal Reserve Board decides to treat these subsidiaries as affiliates.

Concurrently with the adoption of Regulation W, the Federal Reserve Board has proposed a regulation which would further limit the amount of loans that could be purchased by a bank from an affiliate to not more than 100% of the bank’s capital and surplus. As of March 10, 2004, the final regulation had not been adopted.

Community Reinvestment Act

Under the Community Reinvestment Act (“CRA”), as implemented by FDIC regulations, a state bank has a continuing and affirmative obligation consistent with its safe and sound operation to help meet the credit needs of its entire community, including low and moderate income neighborhoods. The CRA does not establish specific lending requirements or programs for financial institutions nor does it limit an institution’s discretion to develop the types of products and services that it believes are best suited to its particular community. The CRA requires the FDIC, in connection with its examination of a state non-member bank, to assess the bank’s record of meeting the credit needs of its community and to take that record into account in its evaluation of certain applications by the bank. Under the FDIC’s CRA evaluation system, the FDIC focuses on three tests: (i) a lending test, to evaluate the institution’s record of making loans in its service areas; (ii) an investment test, to evaluate the institution’s record of investing in community development projects, affordable housing and programs benefiting low or moderate income individuals and businesses; and (iii) a service test, to evaluate the institution’s delivery of services through its branches, ATMs and other offices.

Securities and Exchange Commission

The common stock of the Company is registered with the SEC under the Exchange Act. As a result, the Company and its officers, directors, and major stockholders are obligated to file certain reports with the SEC. The Company is subject to proxy and tender offer rules promulgated pursuant to the Exchange Act.

The Company maintains a website at http://www.lakelandbank.com. The Company makes available on its website the proxy statements and reports on Forms 8-K, 10-K and 10-Q that it files with the SEC as soon as reasonably practicable after such material is electronically filed with or furnished to the SEC.

Effect of Government Monetary Policies

The earnings of the Company are and will be affected by domestic economic conditions and the monetary and fiscal policies of the United States government and its agencies.

The monetary policies of the Federal Reserve Board have had, and will likely continue to have, an important impact on the operating results of commercial banks through the Board’s power to implement national monetary policy in order to, among other things, curb inflation or combat a recession. The Federal Reserve Board has a major effect upon the levels of bank loans, investments and deposits through its open market operations in United States government securities and through its regulation of, among other things, the discount rate of borrowings of banks and the reserve requirements against bank deposits. It is not possible to predict the nature and impact of future changes in monetary fiscal policies.

Dividend Restrictions

The Company is a legal entity separate and distinct from Lakeland. Virtually all of the revenue of the Company available for payment of dividends on its capital stock will result from amounts paid to the Company by Lakeland. All such dividends are subject to various limitations imposed by federal and state laws and by regulations and policies adopted by federal and state regulatory agencies. Under State law, a bank may not pay dividends unless, following the dividend payment, the capital stock of the bank would be unimpaired and either (a) the bank will have a surplus of not less than 50% of its capital stock, or, if not, (b) the payment of the dividend will not reduce the surplus of the bank.

-6-

If, in the opinion of the FDIC, a bank under its jurisdiction is engaged in or is about to engage in an unsafe or unsound practice (which could include the payment of dividends), the FDIC may require, after notice and hearing, that such bank cease and desist from such practice or, as a result of an unrelated practice, require the bank to limit dividends in the future. The Federal Reserve Board has similar authority with respect to bank holding companies. In addition, the Federal Reserve Board and the FDIC have issued policy statements which provide that insured banks and bank holding companies should generally only pay dividends out of current operating earnings. Regulatory pressures to reclassify and charge off loans and to establish additional loan loss reserves can have the effect of reducing current operating earnings and thus impacting an institution’s ability to pay dividends. Further, as described herein, the regulatory authorities have established guidelines with respect to the maintenance of appropriate levels of capital by a bank or bank holding company under their jurisdiction. Compliance with the standards set forth in these policy statements and guidelines could limit the amount of dividends which the Company and Lakeland may pay. Under the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation Improvement Act of 1991 (“FDICIA”), banking institutions which are deemed to be “undercapitalized” will, in most instances, be prohibited from paying dividends. See “FDICIA”. See also Note 18—“Regulatory Matters” of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for further information regarding dividends.

Capital Adequacy Guidelines

The Federal Reserve Board has adopted Risk-Based Capital Guidelines. These guidelines establish minimum levels of capital and require capital adequacy to be measured in part upon the degree of risk associated with certain assets. Under these guidelines all banks and bank holding companies must have a core or tier 1 capital to risk-weighted assets ratio of at least 4% and a total capital to risk-weighted assets ratio of at least 8%. At December 31, 2003, the Company’s Tier 1 capital to risk-weighted assets ratio and total capital to risk-weighted assets ratio were 12.79% and 15.96%, respectively.

In addition, the Federal Reserve Board and the FDIC have approved leverage ratio guidelines (Tier I capital to average quarterly assets, less goodwill) for bank holding companies such as the Company. These guidelines provide for a minimum leverage ratio of 3% for bank holding companies that meet certain specified criteria, including that they have the highest regulatory rating. All other holding companies will be required to maintain a leverage ratio of 3% plus an additional cushion of at least 100 to 200 basis points. The Company’s leverage ratio was 7.84% at December 31, 2003.

Under FDICIA, federal banking agencies have established certain additional minimum levels of capital which accord with guidelines established under that act. See “FDICIA”.

FDICIA

Enacted in December 1991, FDICIA substantially revised the bank regulatory provisions of the Federal Deposit Insurance Act and several other federal banking statutes. Among other things, FDICIA requires federal banking agencies to broaden the scope of regulatory corrective action taken with respect to banks that do not meet minimum capital requirements and to take such actions promptly in order to minimize losses to the FDIC. Under FDICIA, federal banking agencies were required to establish minimum levels of capital (including both a leverage limit and a risk-based capital requirement) and specify for each capital measure the levels at which depository institutions will be considered “well capitalized”, “adequately capitalized”, “undercapitalized”, “significantly undercapitalized” or “critically undercapitalized”.

Under regulations adopted under these provisions, for an institution to be well capitalized it must have a total risk-based capital ratio of at least 10%, a Tier I risk-based capital ratio of at least 6% and a Tier I leverage ratio of at least 5% and not be subject to any specific capital order or directive. For an institution to be adequately capitalized it must have a total risk-based capital ratio of at least 8%, a Tier I risk-based capital ratio of at least 4% and a Tier I leverage ratio of at least 4% (or in some cases 3%). Under the regulations, an institution will be deemed to be undercapitalized if it has a total risk-based capital ratio that is less than 8%, a Tier I risk-based capital ratio that is less than 4%, or a Tier I leverage ratio of less than 4% (or in some cases 3%). An institution will be deemed to be significantly undercapitalized if it has a total risk-based capital ratio that is less than 6%, a Tier I risk-based capital ratio that is less than 3%, or a leverage ratio that is less than 3% and will be deemed to be critically undercapitalized if it has a ratio of tangible equity to total assets that is equal to or less than 2%. An institution may be deemed to be in a capitalization category that is lower than is indicated by its actual capital

-7-

position if it receives an unsatisfactory examination rating or is deemed to be in an unsafe or unsound condition or to be engaging in unsafe or unsound practices. As of December 31, 2003, the Company and Lakeland met all regulatory requirements for classification as well capitalized under the regulatory framework for prompt corrective action.

In addition, FDICIA requires banking regulators to promulgate standards in a number of other important areas to assure bank safety and soundness, including internal controls, information systems and internal audit systems, credit underwriting, asset growth, compensation, loan documentation and interest rate exposure.

Deposit Insurance and Premiums

Lakeland’s deposits are insured by the Bank Insurance Fund (“BIF”) that is administered by the FDIC up to a maximum of $100,000 per depositor. The amount of the premium is determined by the FDIC’s risk-based insurance assessment system in which each insured bank is placed in one of nine assessment risk classifications based on the FDIC’s evaluation. There is a 27 basis point range between the highest and lowest assessment rate. Banks classified as strongest by the FDIC were subject in 2003 to a 0.00% assessment. Lakeland was placed in this category and therefore had a 0.00% assessment rate in 2003.

In addition to this assessment, Lakeland and all other members of the BIF are required to help fund interest payment obligations that the Financing Corporation (“FICO”) has assumed to recapitalize the Savings Association Insurance Fund (“SAIF”). During 2003, a FICO premium of approximately two basis points was charged on BIF deposits. Based on this premium, Lakeland paid FICO premiums of $180,000 in 2003.

Proposed Legislation

From time to time proposals are made in the United States Congress, the New Jersey Legislature, and before various bank regulatory authorities which would alter the powers of, and place restrictions on, different types of banking organizations. It is impossible to predict the impact, if any, of potential legislative trends on the business of the Company and its subsidiaries.

In accordance with federal law providing for deregulation of interest on all deposits, banks and thrift organizations are now unrestricted by law or regulation from paying interest at any rate on most time deposits. It is not clear whether deregulation and other pending changes in certain aspects of the banking industry will result in further increases in the cost of funds in relation to prevailing lending rates.

ITEM 2 - Properties

The Company’s principal office is located at 250 Oak Ridge Road, Oak Ridge, New Jersey. It also maintains an operations center in Branchville, New Jersey.

The Company operates 38 banking locations in Passaic, Morris, Sussex, Bergen, and Essex Counties, New Jersey. The following chart provides information about Lakeland’s leased offices:

-8-

For information regarding all of the Company’s rental obligations, see Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements.

All other offices of the Company are owned and are unencumbered.

ITEM 3 - Legal Proceedings

As the Company has disclosed in its periodic reports filed with the SEC, the Company previously purchased four separate portfolios of predominately commercial leases from Commercial Money Center, Inc. (“CMC”). CMC obtained surety bonds from three surety companies to guarantee each lessee’s performance. Relying on these bonds, the Company and other investors purchased the lease pool payment streams and CMC’s right to payment under the various surety bonds. CMC (and a related entity, Commercial Servicing Corp. (“CSC”)) eventually stopped forwarding to the Company the required amounts.

Ultimately, Lakeland filed separate suits against the three surety companies seeking to enforce Lakeland’s rights under the various surety bonds. The complaints allege that each of the surety companies is liable for the payments due to Lakeland under the leases for which each surety company issued bonds and may not assert fraud as a defense to paying any claim under the bonds. Complaints were filed by the surety companies against Lakeland and other parties, alleging, among other things, that CMC fraudulently induced the surety companies to issue the surety bonds, and that the surety bonds are therefore void. Each surety company also reserved its rights to seek recoupment of the payments it had made.

CMC and CSC filed for bankruptcy protection in May and June, 2002, respectively, in the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of Florida. The Florida Bankruptcy Court ordered that all collections by the servicers and sub-servicers under the leases be paid in escrow to the Bankruptcy Trustee pending final resolution of rights to those collections. On September 18, 2002, the bankruptcy action was transferred to the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of California.

On June 11, 2003, the California Bankruptcy Court approved a settlement agreement among Lakeland, NetBank and the chapter 7 Bankruptcy Trustee. This agreement resolved all claims of the Trustee with respect to the leases that were guaranteed by surety bonds issued by RLI Insurance Company (“RLI”) and American Motorists Insurance Company (“AMICO”), as well as all claims related to the surety bonds. The agreement did not settle the Trustee’s alleged claims related to the leases guaranteed with surety bonds issued by Royal Indemnity Company (“Royal”) or its claims related to those surety bonds.

The Trustee asserts that Lakeland’s interests in the leases were not properly perfected and that he can avoid those interests, as well as Lakeland’s interests in the related surety bonds, under the Bankruptcy Code. Lakeland disputes these claims, but contends that, in any event, it was the responsibility of CMC, as well as all of the surety companies, to make sure that Lakeland’s interests were properly perfected.

The California Bankruptcy Court also approved a settlement agreement between the Trustee and Royal. Under this agreement, Royal agreed, among other things, to fund litigation by the Trustee against Lakeland to avoid its interests in the leases that were guaranteed by surety bonds issued by Royal, as well as Lakeland’s interests in the surety bonds themselves. The Company intends to vigorously defend these claims and to pursue recovery from Royal for all damages suffered and costs incurred as a result of Royal’s financing of these claims.

On October 27, 2003, Lakeland and AMICO finalized a settlement agreement, pursuant to which Lakeland received $2,200,000 from AMICO in full settlement of all claims which Lakeland and AMICO may have had against each other under the bonds issued by AMICO. Lakeland retained all payments previously made by AMICO under AMICO’s “reservation of rights,” and AMICO released and waived any rights it may have had to seek recoupment of such payments from Lakeland.

The settlement agreement between Lakeland and AMICO does not affect the pending litigation between Lakeland and the other two surety companies. Lakeland continues to believe that it has substantial and meritorious positions and claims and is continuing to pursue all rights and remedies against the remaining two surety companies.

-9-

An adversary proceeding complaint was filed against Lakeland by the Bankruptcy Trustee in the U.S. Bankruptcy Court in San Diego on September 4, 2003 and an answer to that complaint was filed by Lakeland on October 31, 2003. The adversary proceeding currently is in the initial phases of discovery. The Bankruptcy Trustee is claiming that it has certain rights to the income stream from the leases guaranteed by the Royal bonds and to the Royal bonds themselves. Lakeland vigorously disputes the Trustee’s claims and has filed a withdrawal of reference motion seeking to withdraw reference of the adversary proceeding from the Bankruptcy Court to the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California. This motion has not yet been argued in court.

A case called Clayton v. CMC is currently pending in the Superior Court of California, Los Angeles County. In that action, California lessees, whose leases were part of various CMC lease pools (including pools purchased by the Company) assert claims relating to usury limitations. The complaint alleges that CMC was never licensed as a lender in California and therefore could not legally charge interest on any loans which it may have originated. The Company has been formally served in this matter. The case is in the preliminary stages.

From time to time, the Company and its subsidiaries are defendants in legal proceedings relating to their respective businesses. While the ultimate outcome of any pending matter cannot be determined at this time, management does not believe that the outcome of any pending legal proceeding will materially affect the consolidated financial position of the Company, but could possibly be material to the consolidated results of operations of any one period.

ITEM 4 - Submission of Matters to a Vote of Security Holders

There were no matters submitted to a vote of security holders of the Company during the fourth quarter of 2003.

ITEM 4A - Executive Officers of the Registrant

The following table sets forth the name and age of each executive officer of the Company. Each officer is appointed by the Company’s Board of Directors. Unless otherwise indicated, the persons named below have held the position indicated for more than the past five years.

-10-

PART II

ITEM 5 - MARKET FOR THE REGISTRANT’S COMMON EQUITY AND RELATED STOCKHOLDER MATTERS

Shares of the common stock of Lakeland Bancorp, Inc. have been traded under the symbol “LBAI” on the Nasdaq National Market since February 22, 2000 and in the over the counter market prior to this date. As of December 31, 2003, there were 3,771 shareholders of record of common stock. The following table sets forth the range of the high and low daily closing prices of the common stock as provided by Nasdaq for the periods presented. Prices and dividends have been adjusted to reflect all stock dividends paid by the Company.

-11-

Dividends on the Company’s Common Stock are within the discretion of the Board of Directors of the Company and are dependent upon various factors, including the future earnings and financial condition of the Company, Lakeland and bank regulatory policies.

The Bank Holding Company Act of 1956 restricts the amount of dividends the Company can pay. Accordingly, dividends should generally only be paid out of current earnings, as defined.

The New Jersey Banking Act of 1948 restricts the amount of dividends paid on the capital stock of New Jersey chartered banks. Accordingly, no dividends shall be paid by such banks on their capital stock unless, following the payment of such dividends, the capital stock of the bank will be unimpaired and the bank will have a surplus of not less than 50% of its capital stock, or, if not, the payment of such dividend will not reduce the surplus of the bank. Under this limitation, approximately $121.9 million was available for the payment of dividends from Lakeland to the Company as of December 31, 2003.

Capital guidelines and other regulatory requirements may further limit the Company’s and Lakeland’s ability to pay dividends. See “Item 1 – Business – Supervision and Regulation – Dividend Restrictions.”

-12-

ITEM 6

SELECTED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL DATA

(Not covered by Report of Independent Certified Public Accountants)