Fifth Nat. Bank of San Antonio v. Iron City Nat. Bank of Llano

• Decision Date: 09 February 1899
• Citation: 49 S.W. 368
• Parties: FIFTH NAT. BANK OF SAN ANTONIO v. IRON CITY NAT. BANK OF LLANO.
• Court: Texas Supreme Court

49 S.W. 368

FIFTH NAT. BANK OF SAN ANTONIO v. IRON CITY NAT. BANK OF LLANO.

Supreme Court of Texas.

February 9, 1899.

Error to court of civil appeals of Fourth supreme judicial district.

Action by the Iron City National Bank of Llano against the Fifth National Bank of San Antonio. A judgment for defendant was reversed by the court of civil appeals (47 S. W. 533), and defendant brings error. Modified.

Shook & Vander Hoeven, Upson, Bergstrom & Newton, and Chas. H. Bertrand, for plaintiff in error. Lauderdale & Linden, for defendant in error.

DENMAN, J.

The Iron City National Bank of Llano began early in April, 1894, doing business with the Fifth National Bank of San Antonio, and made with it large deposits, against which it drew from time to time, in the usual course of business between banks. In May, 1894, W. O. Richardson, as cashier of the Llano bank, directed the cashier of the San Antonio bank to charge the account of the Llano bank with the amount of two notes which Richardson owed the San Antonio bank. In accordance with this direction, the San Antonio bank charged the account of the Llano bank on May 25, 1894, with $5,018.65, that being the balance due on said notes, and at the end of the month, as was shown to be customary with banks, sent the Llano bank a detailed statement of the account between them for the month, as it had done at the end of the previous month, showing amounts deposited in the San Antonio bank to the credit of the Llano bank, and the various charges made by the former against the latter during such month, among which charges appeared said $5,018.65, as having been made in payment of said notes. This statement showed a balance due the Llano bank, which it drew out a few days afterwards. May 21, 1896, the Llano bank brought this suit against the San Antonio bank to recover said $5,018.65, on the ground that Richardson had no authority to direct the application thereof to the payment of his individual notes. The San Antonio bank pleaded that the Llano bank was estopped from denying such authority in its cashier, Richardson. From a verdict and judgment against it, the Llano bank appealed to the court of civil appeals, which court reversed and remanded the cause, on the grounds (1) that the trial court erred in giving certain charges; (2) that there was no evidence sustaining the defense of estoppel; (3) that the judgment was not warranted by the evidence.

The San Antonio bank has brought the case to this court upon writ of error, on the ground that said holding that there was no evidence sustaining the plea of estoppel practically settles its case, alleging that it will be unable to produce any other evidence on another trial. This presents the question of law as to whether there was any evidence in support of such plea. When the notes were settled as above indicated, they were returned to Richardson by the San Antonio bank, together with collateral securing same, consisting of 30 shares of the capital stock of the Llano bank, of $100 each, belonging to Richardson. The statement sent as aforesaid was found months afterwards, in the vaults of the Llano bank,...