History
  • No items yet
midpage
Orient Petroleum Co. v. Wichita State Bank & Trust Co.
17 F.2d 263
5th Cir.
1927
Check Treatment
PER CURIAM.

Appellant presents no question that is not fully considered in the original opinion. However, appellee points out that the Supreme Court of Texas has settled the rule, in respect of an attorney’s fee stipulated in a note, tó be that such a fee is prima facie reasonable, and will be allowed, unless shown to be unreasonable, and cites to that effect Bank v. Robinson, 104 Tex. 166, 135 S. W. 372. Our original opinion is therefore incorrect in stating the Texas rule to be “that only a reasonable amount, and not the amount stipulated in notes providing for attorney’s fees, can be collected, in the absence of proof that the party suing had agreed to pay to his attorney the amount stipulated in the notes sued on.” The application of the correct rule, as it is now understood, would have authorized a larger decree against appellant; but it cannot now operate to the advantage of appellee, because there was no cross-appeal.

The petition for rehearing is denied.

Case Details

Case Name: Orient Petroleum Co. v. Wichita State Bank & Trust Co.
Court Name: Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
Date Published: Feb 7, 1927
Citation: 17 F.2d 263
Docket Number: No. 4646
Court Abbreviation: 5th Cir.
AI-generated responses must be verified and are not legal advice.
Log In