Court Opinion

ID: 9832118
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-09-01 21:38:02.63285+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:43:42.305771
License: Public Domain

On Motion for Rehearing.
 The appellants insist upon this court’s making findings of fact and conclusions of law. The statement of the case, and the evidence, sufficiently appears in the certified questions (Tex. Com. App.) 23 S.W.(2d) 716. The facts appear therein as agreed to and found by the jury. The outstanding facts are, as we conclude, namely: The First State Bank of Paris was insolvent at the time of the reduction of the capital stock from $150,-000 to $100,000, and there was no publication made in a newspaper or otherwise of the intention to reduce the capital stock of the bank. The bank did not file a bond or a policy of insurance with the banking commissioner, but made a deposit of $100,000 in United States bonds, and these bonds were assets of the bank “purchased by the bank with its bills receivable”; and at the date such bond assets were deposited with the banking commissioner the bank was insolvent and no assets were placed in the bank in the place and stead of the bonds. The bank did not make publication in a newspaper in the town where the bank was domiciled of intention to change from the guaranty fund plan to the bond security system. In the circumstances the bank did not legally effect a change from the guaranty fund plan to the bond security system, and did not legally effect a reduction of its capital stock. Under what circumstances an unsecured bank depositor shall be permitted or denied the right to participate in the depositors’ guaranty fund is exclusively a legislative question. The courts cannot deny him the right to participate in the depositors’ guaranty fund so long as he continues within the terms of the statute and the bank legally continues under the guaranty fund plan. If, as here, there is statutory failure to change from the guaranty fund plan, then such unsecured depositor has the legal right to avail himself of the statutory right to have his claim classified and made payable-out of the depositors’ guaranty fund. He cannot be debarred from availing himself of the credit out of the bond assets in case such bond assets are not legally withdrawn.
In keeping, however, with the answer made to certified question No. 6, though not in view of acquiescence, we adheré to the former order reversing the judgment of the district court, and accordingly overrule this motion for rehearing.