Miller v. Bank of Commerce
Court of Appeals of Texas
1Opinion of the Court
MASSEY, Chief Justice.
Counsel for appellant W. R. Miller and appellee Bank of Commerce apparently agree that an action for damages because of fraud lies in those instances when the complainant has been thereby induced to part with any property of value. 25 Tex.Jur.2d 625, “Fraud and Deceit”, § 13, “(Elements of Fraud) — In general”.
Why, says appellant’s counsel, should not a similar action lie in an instance where one has been induced to delay or defer action to collect his debt through another’s fraud, when forbearance on his part results in the loss of a claim which in all reasonable…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Field v. SiegelWisconsin Supreme Court · 1898
- Evans v. BursonSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1917
3Cited by7 opinions
- Barnett v. SternDistrict Court, N.D. Illinois · 1988
- Big Lots Stores, Inc. v. Bain Capital Fund VII, LLCCourt of Chancery of Delaware · 2006
- Carter v. Steverson & Co., Inc., Texas Court of Appeals, 1st District (Houston)2003
- Wynnewood Bank and Trust v. State, Texas Court of Appeals, 5th District (Dallas)1989
- Wilkenson v. LinneckeCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1967
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.