Alaimo v. Woodlands National Bank
This text of 698 S.W.2d 234 (Alaimo v. Woodlands National Bank) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Texas primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
OPINION
Plaintiff below, The Woodlands National Bank, sued one of its depositors, Blanche Alaimo, defendant below, alleging that “the sum of $5,000 was inadvertently and incorrectly deposited into the Defendant’s checking account....”; that defendant withdrew the money, wrongfully appropriating it. A summary judgment was granted plaintiff for this amount together with attorney’s fees. Defendant has perfected appeal to this Court on the sole proposition that the award of attorney’s fees is unauthorized under Texas law and, therefore, improper.
Plaintiff attached to its motion for summary judgment as “Exhibit A” a copy of the deposit agreement. Such agreement does not mention attorney’s fees.1
[235]*235Defendant correctly states that there is no statutory authority for attorney’s fees in a negligence case. TEX.REV.CIV. STAT.ANN. art. 2226 (Vernon Supp.1985) does allow recovery of such fees for “suits founded on oral or written contracts,” and further states that “[t]his Act shall be liberally construed to promote its underlying purposes.”
In Frost Nat. Bank v. Nicholas and Barrera, 534 S.W.2d 927, 933 (Tex.Civ.App.—Tyler 1976, writ ref’d n.r.e.), we find: “The relationship between bank and depositor is contractual_ 8 TEX.JUR.2d Banks, Secs. 234, 236.” Accord: Upper Valley Aviation v. Mercantile Nat. Bank, 656 S.W.2d 952, 955 (Tex.App.—Dallas 1983, writ ref’d n.r.e.); and in Collin County Sav. & Loan v. Miller Lumber, 653 S.W.2d 114, 119 (Tex.App.—Dallas 1983, no writ), we find:
“Finally, Collin Savings complains of the award of attorneys’ fees. We conclude that, because recovery of the deposit was proper, the award of attorneys’ fees is also proper under Tex.Rev.Civ. Stat.Ann. art. 2226 (Vernon Supp.1982-1983).”
Appellant’s point of error is overruled.
The judgment of the trial court is affirmed.
Affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
698 S.W.2d 234, 1985 Tex. App. LEXIS 12293, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/alaimo-v-woodlands-national-bank-texapp-1985.