Hull v. Guaranty State Bank of Carthage

(after stating the facts as above). In the view we take of the case it is not necessary to determine whether Hull’s contention that the testimony warranted a finding that Trabue assumed to act for the bank in executing the note, and a •finding that the bank was the beneficiary in the transactions constituting the consideration of the note, is tenable or not, for we think if such findings were warranted the bank nevertheless was not liable on the note, because of the provision in article 378, Vernon’s Statutes, that “no bills payable” should be made on behalf of such a bank “except with the…