Legal Opinion
Kasparek v. Liberty Nat. Bank of Oklahoma City
Supreme Court of Oklahoma
Decided November 27, 1934No. 22240PublishedCited by 13 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtRiley, C. J.
Herein is presented the qiiestion of the right of a bank to apply the balance of a customer's deposit to the payment of a note held by the bank, executed by the depositor, where the note matured after the death of the maker.
On August 18, 1928, Joe Kasparek executed and delivered his promissory note to the Liberty National Bank of Oklahoma City, defendant in error herein, in the sum of $5,000, due and payable September 17, 1928, with interest at 10 per cent., from maturity. It appears to have been a renewal of a note for a like amount given in February, 1928.
•The- maker clied on. or about…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Hunt v. Rousmanier's AdministratorsSupreme Court of the United States · 1823
- Patterson v. . PattersonNew York Court of Appeals · 1875
- Jordan v. . National Shoe and Leather BankNew York Court of Appeals · 1878
- Ainsworth v. Bank of CaliforniaCalifornia Supreme Court · 1897
- Pendleton v. Hellman Commercial Trust & Savings BankCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1922
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by13 opinions
- Bandy v. FIRST STATE BANK, OVERTON, TEX.Texas Supreme Court · 1992
- Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, as Receiver of Penn Square Bank, N.A. v. The Liberty National Bank & Trust Co., Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, as Receiver of Penn Square Bank, N.A. v. Utica National Bank and Trust CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1986
- Ames Trust and Savings Bank v. ReichardtSupreme Court of Iowa · 1963
- Ingram v. LIBERTY NATL. BANK & TRUST CO. OF OKLAHOMA CITYSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1975
- In Re Leon Keyser, Inc.Supreme Court of New Hampshire · 1953
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.