Case Name: Lela Avant v. Chas. D. Austin, Banking Commissioner, et al.
Court: Supreme Court of Texas
Jurisdiction: Texas
Decision Date: 1926-01-06
Citations: 115 Tex. 167
Docket Number: Application No. 14383
Parties: Lela Avant v. Chas. D. Austin, Banking Commissioner, et al.
Judges: 
Reporter: Texas Reports
Volume: 115
Pages: 167–168

Head Matter:
Lela Avant v. Chas. D. Austin, Banking Commissioner, et al.
Application No. 14383.
Decided January 6, 1926.
(278 S. W., 1101.)
Russell & Siurley, for petitioner.

Opinion:
Per Curiam :
The deposit in this case in its inception was an interest bearing deposit, and while by the expiration of time it may have ceased to bear interest for such additional time as the money was left in the bank, yet the interest agreed upon for the specified time was compensation for such time as the money was left in the bank under the contract. The character of the contract was never changed. The certificate was not subsequent to the time it ceased to bear interest presented to the bank and a new deposit contract created. It is clear, therefore, that the deposit was not a non-interest-bearing deposit. The writ of error is accordingly refused.