Legal Opinion

Rose v. First St. Bank of Paris, Tex.

Court of Appeals of Texas

Decided May 12, 1931No. 3975PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtLevy, J.

(after stating the ease as above).

The point presented for decision is that of whether or not the cause of action was barred by the statute of limitations. The answer depends, first, on how the action should be classified. The asserted right of action is founded solely on article 533, R. S. 1925, which is as follows: “No president, director, manager, cashier or other officer'or agent of any bank or banking institution organized and doing business under the provisions of this article shall receive or assent to the reception of deposits, or create or assent to the creation of any debts by such…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Corsicana Nat. Bank of Corsicana v. JohnsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1919
  2. Yeaman v. Galveston City CompanyTexas Supreme Court · 1914
  3. Gordon v. Rhodes & DanielTexas Supreme Court · 1909
  4. Nebraska National Bank v. WalshSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1900
  5. McCord v. W.A. NaboursTexas Supreme Court · 1908

4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Rose v. First St. Bk. of ParisTexas Supreme Court · 1933
  2. Broderick v. PardueCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1936
  3. Jones v. CanonDistrict Court, W.D. Texas · 1933
  4. Hidalgo County Bank & Trust Co. v. GoodwinCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1940
  5. Green v. WilkinsonDistrict Court, N.D. Texas · 1955

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API