United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co. v. First Nat. Bank

(concurring in part and dissenting in part)..1 concur in the holdings of the majority opinion: (1) that Article 342 — 711 of the Civil Statutes of Texas did not prevent a recovery against the bank for failure of the Pipe Line Company to notify the bank in writing that certain of the endorsements were forged and unauthorized; (2) that the bonding company, generally speaking, stands in the shoes of the Pipe Line Company; (3) that since the cause of action here is one based on subrogation, and since subrogation will not be applied so as to allow recovery against the bank, where the bank was…