Court Opinion

ID: 9831909
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-09-01 21:28:36.836086+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:43:39.353624
License: Public Domain

On Rehearing.
[3] We were in error in rendering judgment over against the City National Bank of Dallas in favor of the Waggoner Bank & Trust Company on its cross-plea, inasmuch as the terms of the agreement upon which the City National Bank accepted the checks for collection precluded recovery. In accepting the checks for collection it was stipulated by the City National Bank as follows: “All items not payable in Dallas received by this bank for credit or collection are taken upon the express condition that this bank is not to be held liable for the acts or omissions of any other banks or collectors to whom they may be hereafter transmitted, or for loss in transmission, the liability of this bank being hereby limited to its own acts and should the collecting party convert the proceeds or remit the checks or drafts which are thereafter dishonored, the amount for which credit has been given will be charged back. We will use our discretion as to sending direct or through intermediary banks for collecting, acting as agent only and assuming no responsibility beyond carefulness in selecting such agents." It seems to be undisputed in the evidence that as soon as the City National Bank was informed that the collecting bank had credited its account instead of remitting the money, it advised the Waggoner Bank & Trust Company of that fact, and also advised it that its account was being charged with that amount, and the Waggoner Bank & Trust Company credited the City National Bank with the item. Under these circumstances the Waggoner Bank & Trust Company was not entitled to judgment over against the City National Bank of Dallas, and our former judgment in this respect is set aside and judgment rendered in favor of the City National Bank of Dallas uppn such cross-plea.
The motion for a rehearing by the Wag-goner Bank & Trust Company is overruled.