Legal Opinion · Dissent

Bottrell v. American Bank

Montana Supreme Court

Decided April 4, 1989No. 87-209Published

1DissentJustice Weber

I dissent because I conclude there was insufficient evidence to sustain the compensatory damage award. I also conclude that the Bank properly exercised its right of set-off.

A brief review of facts during the months of May, June and July, 1983 will help to demonstrate the financial problems on the part of NLL. Bank officers testified that it was their understanding that NLL was doing all of its business with the Bank. The Bank had no knowledge of the borrowings from Mr. Tisor. The evidence established that NLL borrowed $75,000 from Mr. Tisor in May and another $65,000 on July 11, 1983. On June…

2Cases cited18 opinions

  1. Tri-Tron International, a Montana Corporation v. A. A. Velto and William Wurz, Etc.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1975
  2. Bank of Nevada v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1958
  3. Bolz v. MyersMontana Supreme Court · 1982
  4. McKean v. German-American Savings BankCalifornia Supreme Court · 1897
  5. Smith v. ZeppMontana Supreme Court · 1977

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

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

Powered by the Exa API