Chapman v. Reese
Decision Date | 08 January 1925 |
Docket Number | (No. 1164.)<SMALL><SUP>*</SUP></SMALL> |
Citation | 268 S.W. 967 |
Parties | CHAPMAN, State Com'r of Banking, v. REESE. |
Court | Texas Court of Appeals |
Appeal from District Court, Tyler County; J. M. Combs, Judge.
Suit by J. L. Chapman, State Commissioner of Banking, in charge of the affairs of the Tyler County State Bank, insolvent, against M. M. Reese. From judgment giving him insufficient relief, plaintiff appeals. Affirmed.
W. J. Rogers, of Eastland, for appellant.
Mooney & Smith and J. E. Wheat, all of Woodville, for appellee.
O'QUINN, J.
J. L. Chapman, commissioner of banking for the state of Texas, in charge of the affairs of the Tyler County State Bank, insolvent, sued M. M. Reese, a stockholder in said bank, to recover the sum of $1,991.45, alleged to be a balance due on an assessment levied on the stock owned by Reese. Reese owned 40 shares of the stock of said bank at the time it ceased to do business and was taken in charge by the commissioner. The assessment was in the sum of $4,000. Reese, at the time the bank closed, had on deposit in said bank, subject to his check, $1,008.55. His wife had a checking account in said bank in the sum of $1,000. Both of these were applied on the assessment, leaving a balance of $1,991.45, the amount sued for.
The defendant, Reese, answered by general demurrer, general denial, and plea of payment, as follows:
The defendant further pleaded:
To this answer, plaintiff replied by supplemental petition containing a general denial of the several matters of defense pleaded, and several special exceptions and pleas which need not be set out. The case was tried before the court without a jury, and at the conclusion of the evidence, and before the rendition of judgment, defendant abandoned his plea as to the Liberty bonds, but insisted upon his pleas of all other payments. The court sustained the payment of $600 and $1,040, represented by the time certificate of deposit, and rendered judgment for plaintiff for $351.45. From this judgment, plaintiff has appealed.
At the request of plaintiff, the court made and filed his findings of fact and conclusions of law, which, so far as is necessary to set out, are:
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Western Union Life Co. of Houston v. Ensminger
...v. Alamo Nat. Bank, 52 Tex.Civ.App. 561, 114 S.W. 909; Tyler County State Bank v. Shivers (Tex.Civ.App.) 281 S.W. 264; Chapman v. Reese (Tex.Civ.App.) 268 S.W. 967; Standard Acc. Ins. Co. v. Williams (Tex.Civ. App.) 4 S.W.(2d) 1023; Atwood v. Natural Pet. Co. (Tex.Civ.App.) 7 S.W.(2d) 964; ......
-
Tyler County State Bank v. Shivers
...asserted thereunder. Cannon v. Cannon, 3 S. W. 36, 66 Tex. 682; Railway Co. v. Hinzie, 18 S. W. 681, 82 Tex. 628; Chapman v. Reese (Tex. Civ. App.) 268 S. W. 970 (writ refused). Propositions in briefs cannot supply or take the place of valid assignments. Cammack v. Rogers, 73 S. W. 795, 96 ......
-
Garonzik v. Green
...to have ascertained that fact. Besides, the assignment being too general, it cannot be aided by the proposition. Chapman v. Reese (Tex. Civ. App.) 268 S. W. 967 (writ refused). Moreover, the proposition contains a ground of error that was not presented to the court below in the motion for n......
-
Wacasey v. Wacasey
...of Civil Appeals), we think a conclusion that the assignments are objectionable on the grounds urged is inescapable. See Chapman v. Reese (Tex. Civ. App.) 268 S. W. 967; Slaydon v. Fuller (Tex. Civ. App.) 266 S. W. 573; Nogals Oil & Gas Co. v. Bank (Tex. Civ. App.) 264 S. W. 341; Texas Empl......