First Nat. Bank of Amarillo v. Rush
Texas Commission of Appeals
Error to Court of Civil Appeals of Séventh. Supreme Judicial District. Suit by the First National Bank of Amarillo against J. W. Rush, in which W. H. Fuqua intervened. There was a judgment of the Court of Civil Appeals reversing a judgment in, favor of plaintiff (160 S. W. 319, 609) and plaintiff and' intervener bring error.
1Opinion of the CourtMontgomery, P. J.
This suit was instituted by the First National Bank of Amarillo (hereinafter for convenience designated as the bank) on the 16th day of March, 1910, against J. W. Rush and "Mattie E. Rush, his wife.
' The plaintiff alleged that the defendant had on the 24th day of March, 1906, executed and delivered to it a promissory note for $12,000, payable on demand and bearing interest at 10 per cent., and providing for 10 per cent, attorney’s fees. The bank sought a judgment for the amount of the note, interest, and attorney’s fees, and also a foreclosure on certain notes executed by one Gid Jowell to…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Kauffman v. RaederCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1901
- Klueter v. Joseph Schlitz Brewing Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1910
- Haldeman v. ChambersTexas Supreme Court · 1857
- Heirs of Nat. Watrous v. McKieTexas Supreme Court · 1880
3Cited by52 opinions
- Murphy v. DilworthTexas Supreme Court · 1941
- Trust Co., Indp. Exctr. v. BauereisenTexas Supreme Court · 1938
- First National Bank of Amarillo v. RushTexas Commission of Appeals · 1922
- Christie v. First State Bank (In Re Keener)United States Bankruptcy Court, N.D. Texas · 2003
- Scott v. WaldenTexas Commission of Appeals · 1942
47 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.