Legal Opinion
Security Bank & Trust Co. v. Bogard
Indiana Court of Appeals
Decided June 30, 1986No. 4-985A246PublishedCited by 27 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MILLER, Judge.
Security Bank & Trust Co. sued Francis Bogard because he was in default on seven promissory notes. Bogard counterclaimed, alleging Security caused the default because it agreed to a loan for his farming operations and then refused to lend him any money. The trial court granted judgment to Security on the defaulted notes and to Bogard on his counterclaim for damages. Security appeals, challenging the trial court's conclusion that it was liable to Bogard either for breach of contract or under the doctrine of promissory estoppel.
We reverse.
FACTS
Security is a banking institution…
Also in this document: Concurrence.
2Cases cited4 opinions
- E. I. Du Pont De Nemours & Co. v. Claiborne-Reno Co.Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1933
- SECO CHEMICALS, INC., ETC. v. StewartIndiana Court of Appeals · 1976
- Hawkins v. McGeeSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1929
- Tipton County Farm Bureau Cooperative Ass'n v. HooverIndiana Court of Appeals · 1985
3Cited by27 opinions
- Barry C. Cosgrove, Cross-Appellee v. Joseph Bartolotta and Mary-Bart, Llc, Doing Business as Bartolotta's Lake Park BistroCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1998
- R.E. Wood, Jr. And Julie Wood v. Mid-Valley IncorporatedCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1991
- First National Bank of Logansport v. Logan Mfg. Co.Indiana Supreme Court · 1991
- Medtech Corp. v. Indiana Insurance Co.Indiana Court of Appeals · 1990
- Garwood Packaging, Inc. v. Allen & Company, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 2004
22 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.