Gray v. Bertrand
| Decision Date | 28 January 1987 |
| Docket Number | No. C-6005,C-6005 |
| Citation | 723 S.W.2d 957 |
| Parties | 2 UCC Rep.Serv.2d 1603 Robert Earl GRAY et al., Petitioners, v. Bradley W. BERTRAND et al., Respondents. |
| Court | Texas Supreme Court |
Charles K. Kebodeauz, Orgain, Bell & Tucker, Beaumont, for petitioners.
C.A. Davis, Hathaway & Davis, Austin, Richard G. Lewis, Boneau & Lewis, Port Arthur, for respondents.
This is a suit for damages based upon two separate charges of misconduct by InterFirst Bank Nederland. First, the bank is alleged to have paid the proceeds of a multi-party certificate of deposit in violation of the contractual term of endorsement on the certificate. Second, the bank is accused of having denied the existence of an investment account, in effect converting that account. The trial court rendered summary judgment in favor of the defendant bank and its board chairman, Robert Earl Gray, as to both causes of action. The court of appeals reversed that judgment and remanded the case for trial. 718 S.W.2d 908. Before this court, the bank complains only of the court of appeals' holding as to the certificate of deposit. We reverse the judgment of the court of appeals and affirm that of the trial court in respect to the certificate of deposit. The judgment of the court of appeals is affirmed in respect to the investment account.
A certificate of deposit in the amount of $120,000 was issued by InterFirst Bank Nederland in the names of "Dr. Carl B. Bertrand or Waymond Keith, Bradley W., Carl B., or Wesley J. or Lema Gail Bertrand." It matured on December 12, 1982. On December 13, 1982, the certificate of deposit was reissued in the name of Lema Gail Bertrand, Dr. Bertrand's wife, at her request. The certificate of deposit was transferred without an endorsement, but contained the legend On December 18, 1982, Dr. Carl Bertrand died. On December 20, 1982, three of Dr. Bertrand's sons, Bradley, Carl, and Wesley, inquired at the bank regarding accounts in their names and requested withdrawal of the same. Initially, the bank denied the existence of any accounts in their names. Upon discovery that the multi-party certificate of deposit had been cashed and that the investment account had been transferred to Lema Bertrand, the three sons filed suit against the bank for conversion of the investment account and conversion and breach of contract based on the fact that the certificate of deposit had no endorsement. Endorsement was a contractual condition precedent to receipt of the funds under the terms of the certificate of deposit.
InterFirst Bank Nederland's motion for summary judgment was accompanied by the affidavit of Lema Gail Bertrand, which stated that although the certificate of deposit did not bear her endorsement, the proceeds were transferred to her at her specific request and with her acquiescence. The theory on which summary judgment was granted InterFirst as to the...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Bradt v. West
...by showing that at least one element of the plaintiff's cause of action has been conclusively established against him. Gray v. Bertrand, 723 S.W.2d 957, 958 (Tex.1987); Jaime, 853 S.W.2d at 607. A matter is "conclusively established" for summary judgment purposes if ordinary minds cannot di......
-
Maranatha Temple, Inc. v. Enterprise Products Co.
...by showing that at least one element of the plaintiff's cause of action has been conclusively established against him. Gray v. Bertrand, 723 S.W.2d 957, 958 (Tex.1987); Jaime, 853 S.W.2d at 607. A matter is "conclusively established" for summary judgment purposes if ordinary minds cannot di......
-
Travis v. City of Mesquite
...at least one element of the plaintiff's cause of action has been established conclusively against the plaintiff. See Gray v. Bertrand, 723 S.W.2d 957, 958 (Tex.1987). The essential elements of actionable negligence consist of the following: a legal duty owed by one person to another; a brea......
-
Oliver v. Rogers
...showing that at least one element of plaintiff's cause of action has been established conclusively against plaintiff, Gray v. Bertrand, 723 S.W.2d 957, 958 (Tex.1987), or by conclusively proving all elements of an affirmative defense as a matter of law such that there is no genuine issue of......