How cited: Dulong v. Citibank (South Dakota), N.A. · Go Syfert

Dulong v. Citibank (South Dakota), N.A. (2008)

green · 155 citation events across 1 courts. Showing the 50 strongest citers on record (one row per citing case, strongest signal kept).
Treatment trajectory · 2001 → 2026 · click a year to view the case as of then
200120132026
Rule Authority · Tex. App. · 4 citations in this opinion
Dulong v. Citibank (South Dakota), N.A., 261 S.W.3d 890, 893 (Tex. App.—Dallas 2008, no pet.) (lack of personal knowledge and failure to comply with business records exception to hearsay rule); Pico v. Capriccio Italian Rest., Inc., 209 S.W.3d 902, 909 (Tex. App.— Houston [14th Dist.] 2006, no pet.) (hearsay and speculation); Choctaw Props., L.L.C. v. Aledo I.S.D., 127 S.W.3d 235, 241 (Tex. App.—Waco 2003, no pet.) (affidavit of interested witness, hearsay, lack of personal …
Rule Authority · Tex. App. · 4 citations in this opinion
Dulong v. Citibank (South Dakota), N.A., 261 S.W.3d 890, 893 (Tex.App.-Dallas 2008, no pet.) (lack of personal knowledge and failure to comply with business records exception to hearsay rule); Pico v. Capriccio Italian Rest., Inc., 209 S.W.3d 902, 909 (Tex.App.Houston [14th Dist.] 2006, no pet.) (hearsay and speculation); Choctaw Props., L.L.C. v. Aleda I.S.D., 127 S.W.3d 235, 241 (Tex.App.-Waco 2003, no pet.) (affidavit of interested witness, hearsay, lack of personal knowl…
Rule Authority · Tex. App. · 3 citations in this opinion
Dulong v. Citibank (S.D.), N.A., 261 S.W.3d 890, 893 (Tex. App.—Dallas 2008, no pet.); Neil v. Agris, 693 S.W.2d 604, 605 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 1985, no writ).
Rule Authority · Tex. App. · 3 citations in this opinion
Busch v. Hudson & Keyse, LLC, 312 S.W.3d 294, 299 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 2010, no pet.); Dulong v. Citibank (South Dakota), N.A., 261 S.W.3d 890, 893 (Tex. App.—Dallas 2008, no pet.).
Rule Authority · Tex. App. · 3 citations in this opinion
See, e.g., McFarland v. Citibank (S.D.), N.A., 293 S.W.3d 759, 762 (Tex. App.—Waco 2009, no pet.); Dulong v. Citibank (S.D.), N.A., 261 S.W.3d 890, 893 (Tex. App.—Dallas 2009, no pet.).
Rule Authority · Tex. App. · 3 citations in this opinion
See, e.g. , McFarland v. Citibank (S.D.), N.A. , 293 S.W.3d 759, 762 (Tex. App.--Waco 2009, no pet.); Dulong v. Citibank (S.D.), N.A. , 261 S.W.3d 890, 893 (Tex. App.--Dallas 2009, no pet.).
Rule Authority · Tex. App. · 3 citations in this opinion
Dulong v. Citibank (South Dakota), N.A., 261 S.W.3d 890, 893 (Tex.App.-Dallas 2008, no pet.); *408 Neil v. Agris, 693 S.W.2d 604, 605 (Tex.App.-Houston [14th Dist.] 1985, no writ); McFarland v. Citibank (South Dakota), N.A., 293 S.W.3d 759, 763 (Tex.App.-Waco 2009, no pet.) (not yet reported).
Rule Authority · Tex. App. · 3 citations in this opinion
Dulong v. Citibank (South Dakota), N.A. , 261 S.W.3d 890, 893 (Tex. App.-Dallas 2008, no pet.); Neil v. Agris , 693 S.W.2d 604, 605 (Tex. App.-Houston [14th Dist.] 1985, no writ); McFarland v. Citibank (South Dakota), N.A. , No. 10-07-00277-CV, -- S.W.3d --, 2009 WL 1693406, at *3 (Tex. App.-Waco June 17, 2009, no pet.) (not yet reported).
Rule Authority · Tex. App. · 2 citations in this opinion
N.A., 397 S.W.3d 876 (Tex. App.—Dallas 2013, no pet.); Dulong v. Citibank (S.D.), N.A., 261 S.W.3d 890, 893 (Tex. App.—Dallas 2008, no pet.).
Rule Authority · Tex. App. · 2 citations in this opinion
Eaves v. Unifund CCR Partners, 301 S.W.3d 402, 407-08 (Tex.App.--El Paso 2009, no pet.); McFarland v. Citibank (South Dakota), N.A., 293 S.W.3d 759, 763 (Tex.App.--Waco 2009, no pet.); Dulong v. Citibank (South Dakota), N.A., 261 S.W.3d 890, 893 (Tex.App.--Dallas 2008, no pet.).
Rule Authority · Tex. App. · 2 citations in this opinion
Eaves v. Unifund CCR Partners, 301 S.W.3d 402, 407-08 (Tex.App.--El Paso 2009, no pet.); McFarland v. Citibank (South Dakota), N.A., 293 S.W.3d 759, 763 (Tex.App.--Waco 2009, no pet.); Dulong v. Citibank (South Dakota), N.A., 261 S.W.3d 890, 893 (Tex.App.--Dallas 2008, no pet.).
Rule Authority · Tex. App. · 2 citations in this opinion
Field v. N.A., 261 S.W.3d 890, 893 (Tex.App.-Dallas 2008, no pet.) Shaw, 535 S.W.2d 3, 5 (Tex.App.-Amarillo 1976, no writ). (“[T]o preserve error on objections to summary judgment A condition subsequent gives grantor the right to terminate evidence, the complainant must secure a ruling on her the leasehold estate upon the occurrence of an event but must objection.”).
Rule Authority · Tex. App. · 2 citations in this opinion
“A party is entitled to relief for a stated account where (1) transactions between the parties give rise to indebtedness of one to the other; (2) an agreement, express or implied, between the parties fixes an amount due, and (3) the one to be charged makes a promise, express or implied, to pay the indebtedness.” Id. at 407–08 (citing, among other authority, Dulong v. Citibank (S. Dakota), N.A., 261 S.W.3d 890, 893 (Tex. App.—Dallas 2008, no pet.)).
Rule Authority · Tex. App. · 2 citations in this opinion
Mr. Long has failed to raise a genuine issue of material fact on Deutsche Bank’s counterclaim for judicial foreclosure. ................................................................................20 Prayer .......................................................................................................................24 Certificate of Compliance ........................................................................................25 Certificate of Service .......…
Rule Authority · Tex. App. · 2 citations in this opinion
Servs., Inc., No. 05-12-00068-CV, 2013 WL 2563785 , at *2 (Tex. App.—Dallas June 7, 2013, no pet. h.) (mem. op.); Dulong v. Citibank (S.D.), N.A., 261 S.W.3d 890, 893 (Tex. App.—Dallas 2008, no pet.); Cooper v. Circle Ten Council Boy Scouts of Am., 254 S.W.3d 689, 697 (Tex. App.—Dallas 2008, no pet.); Stewart v. Sanmina Tex. L.P., 156 S.W.3d 198, 207 (Tex. App.—Dallas 2005, no pet.); Thompson v. Curtis, 127 S.W.3d 446, 450 (Tex. App.—Dallas 2004, no pet.). 19 See, e.g., Sund…
Rule Authority · Tex. App. · 2 citations in this opinion
Compton, 364 S.W.3d at 417-18 ; Dulong v. Citibank (S.D.), N.A., 261 S.W.3d 890, 893 (Tex. App.––Dallas 2008, no pet.).
Rule Authority · Tex. App. · 2 citations in this opinion
Dulong v. Citibank (South Dakota), N.A., 261 S.W.3d 890, 893 (Tex. App.—Dallas 2008, no pet.); Well Solutions, Inc. v. Stafford, 32 S.W.3d 313, 317 (Tex. App.—San Antonio, 2000, no pet.); see TEX.
Rule Authority · Tex. App. · 2 citations in this opinion
Dulong v. Citibank (S.D.), N.A. , 261 S.W.3d 890, 893 (Tex. App.—Dallas 2008, no pet.).
Rule Authority · Tex. App. · 2 citations in this opinion
Dulong v. Citibank (South Dakota), N.A., 261 S.W.3d 890, 893 (Tex. App.–Dallas 2008, no pet.); Neil v. Agris, 693 S.W.2d 604, 605 (Tex. App.–Houston [14th Dist.] 1985, no writ); McFarland v. Citibank (South Dakota), N.A., No. 10-07-00277-CV, — S.W.3d —, 2009 WL 1693406, at *3 (Tex. App.–Waco June 17, 2009, no pet.) (not yet reported).
Rule Authority · Tex. App. · 2 citations in this opinion
Dulong v. Citibank (South Dakota), N.A., 261 S.W.3d 890, 893 (Tex. App.—Dallas 2008, no pet.); Seidner v. Citibank (South Dakota), N.A., 201 S.W.3d 332, 334-35 (Tex. App.— Houston [14th Dist.] 2006, pet. denied); Choctaw Props., L.L.C. v. Aledo I.S.D., 127 S.W.3d 235, 241 (Tex. App.—Waco 2003, no pet.).
Rule Authority · Tex. App.
See Walker, 458 S.W.3d at 695 (holding under almost identical facts that it was reasonable to infer that credit cardholder agreed to full amount shown on statements and impliedly promised to pay indebtedness); McFarland, 293 S.W.3d at 764 (same); Dulong v. Citibank (S. Dakota), N.A., 261 S.W.3d 890, 894 (Tex. App.—Dallas 2008, no pet.) (same); see also Hwang, 2023 WL 166434 , at *9 (same).
Rule Authority · Tex. App.
Damron v. Citibank (S.D.), N.A., No. 03-09-00438-CV, 2010 WL 3377777 , at *4 (Tex. App.—Austin Aug. 25, 2010, pet. denied) (mem. op.) (first citing Busch v. Hudson & Keyse, LLC, 312 S.W.3d 294, 299 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 2010, no pet.); and then citing Dulong v. Citibank (S.D.), N.A., 261 S.W.3d 890, 893 (Tex. App.—Dallas 2008, no pet.)).
Rule Authority · Tex. App.
Groff, 2020 WL 4873171 , at *2; Busch, 312 S.W.3d at 299 ; Dulong v. Citibank (S.D.), N.A., 261 S.W.3d 890, 893 (Tex. App.—Dallas 2008, no pet.).
Rule Authority · Tex. App.
See, e.g., Bank of America, N.A. v. Groff, No. 14-19-00726-CV, 2021 WL 98559 , at *4 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] Jan. 12, 2021, no pet.) (mem. op.); Busch v. Hudson & Keyse, L.L.C., 312 S.W.3d 294, 299 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 2010, no pet.); McFarland v. Citibank (S. Dakota), N.A., 293 S.W.3d 759, 763 (Tex. App.—Waco 2009, no pet.); Dulong v. Citibank (S. Dakota), N.A., 261 S.W.3d 890, 893 (Tex. App.—Dallas 2008, no pet.); see Continental Cas.
citing Arnold D. Kamen & Co. v. Young, 466 S.W.2d 381, 388 (Tex. Civ. App.—Dallas 1971, writ ref’d n.r.e.)
Rule Authority · Tex. App.
See Eaves v. Unifund CCR Partners, 301 S.W.3d 402, 405 (Tex. App.—El Paso 2009, no pet.) (concluding Unifund Partners had standing to sue to collect the debt because “[t]he bill of sale from Citibank to Unifund Portfolio conveyed good and marketable title to the account, and more importantly, Unifund Portfolio expressly assigned the rights to collect on the account, including litigation, to Unifund Partners”); Dulong v. Citibank (S.D.), N.A., 261 S.W.3d 890, 894 (Tex. App.—D…
Rule Authority · Tex. App.
See Evans v. Citibank (S.D.), N.A., No. 05-11-01107-CV, 2013 WL 2488789 , at *5 (Tex. App.—Dallas June 7, 2013, no pet.) (mem. op.); Compton, 364 S.W.3d at 418 ; Dulong v. Citibank (S.D.), N.A., 261 S.W.3d 890, 893 (Tex. App.—Dallas 2008, no pet.).
Rule Authority · Tex. App.
See Walker v. Citibank, N.A., No. 11-13-00042-CV, 2015 WL 1004395, at *3 (Tex. App.—Eastland Feb. 27, 2015, no pet. h.) (concluding that “an account[-]stated cause of action is appropriate for a suit to collect credit card debt” and setting out the elements of an account-stated claim); DuLong v. Citibank (S.D.), N.A., 261 S.W.3d 890, 893 (Tex. App.—Dallas 2008, no pet.) (same); see also Morrison v. Citibank (S.D.) N.A., No. 02-07-00130-CV, 2008 WL 553284 , at *1 (Tex. App.—F…
Rule Authority · Tex. App.
In Montoya , the court set out the elements for an account stated claim and specifically recognized that a “party is entitled to relief for a stated account.” 2010 WL 4261481 , at *2 (citing Dulong v. Citibank (S.D.), N.A., 261 S.W.3d 890, 893 (Tex.App.-Dallas 2008, no pet.).
Rule Authority · Tex. App.
Dulong v. Citibank (S.D.), N.A., 261 S.W.3d 890, 893 (Tex. App.—Dallas 2008, no pet.).
Rule Authority · Tex. App.
“An express contract arises when its terms are stated by the parties whereas an implied contract can arise from the acts and conduct of the parties.” Dulong v. Citibank (S.D.), N.A. , 261 S.W.3d 890, 894 (Tex. App.—Dallas 2008, no pet.) (citing Harrison v. Williams Dental Group, P.C. , 140 S.W.3d 912, 916 (Tex. App.—Dallas 2004, no pet.)).
Rule Authority · Tex. App.
“An express contract arises when its terms are stated by the parties whereas an implied contract can arise from the acts and conduct of the parties.” Dulong v. Citibank (S.D.), N.A., 261 S.W.3d 890, 894 (Tex. App.— Dallas 2008, no pet.) (citing Harrison v. Williams Dental Group, P.C., 140 S.W.3d 912, 916 (Tex. App.—Dallas 2004, no pet.)).
green Effel v. McGarry (2011)
Rule Authority · Tex. App.
Dulong v. Citibank (South Dakota), N.A., 261 S.W.3d 890, 891 (Tex.App.-Dallas 2008, no -writ).
Rule Authority · Tex. App.
See, e.g., McFarland v. Citibank (S.D.), N.A., 293 S.W.3d 759, 762 (Tex. App.—Waco 2009, no pet.); Dulong v. Citibank (S.D.), N.A., 261 S.W.3d 890, 893 (Tex. App.—Dallas 2009, no pet.).
Rule Authority · Tex. App.
See, e.g. , McFarland v. Citibank (S.D.), N.A. , 293 S.W.3d 759, 762 (Tex. App.--Waco 2009, no pet.); Dulong v. Citibank (S.D.), N.A. , 261 S.W.3d 890, 893 (Tex. App.--Dallas 2009, no pet.).
Rule Authority · Tex. App.
Dulong v. Citibank (S.D.), N.A., 261 S.W.3d 890, 893 (Tex. App.—Dallas 2008, no pet.).
Rule Authority · Tex. App.
Dulong v. Citibank (South Dakota), N.A., 261 S.W.3d 890, 893 (Tex. App.—Dallas 2008, no pet.); Seidner v. Citibank (South Dakota), N.A. , 201 S.W.3d 332, 334-35 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 2006, pet. denied); Choctaw Props., L.L.C. v. Aledo I.S.D., 127 S.W.3d 235, 241 (Tex. App.—Waco 2003, no pet.).
Rule Authority · Tex. App.
See McFarland Citibank (S.D.), N.A. , 293 S.W.3d 759, 764 (Tex. App.—Waco 2009, no pet.); Dulong v. Citibank (S.D.), N.A. , 261 S.W.3d 890, 893 (Tex. App.—Dallas 2008, no pet.); Tully v. Citibank (S.D.), N.A. , 173 S.W.3d 212, 216 (Tex. App.—Texarkana 2005, no pet.).
Rule Authority · Tex. App.
See McFarland v. Citibank (S.D.), N.A., 293 S.W.3d 759, 764 (Tex.App.-Waco 2009, no pet.); Dulong v. Citibank (S.D.), N.A, 261 S.W.3d 890, 893 (Tex.App.-Dallas 2008, no pet.); Tully v. Citibank (S.D.), N.A, 173 S.W.3d 212, 216 (Tex.App.-Texarkana 2005, no pet.).
Rule Authority · Tex. App.
See, e.g., Tully, 173 S.W.3d at 216 ; Dulong v. Citibank (South Dakota), N.A. , 261 S.W.3d 890, 893 (Tex.App.–Dallas 2008, no pet.) ; Butler v. Hudson & Keyse, L.L.C ., No. 14-07-00534-CV, 2009 WL 402329 , at *3 (Tex.App.–Houston [14th Dist.] Feb. 19, 2009, no pet.) (mem. op.) (all applying common-law cause of action for “account stated”); Rowlands v. Unifund CCR, No. 14-05-01122-CV, 2007 WL 1395101 , *2 (Tex.App.–Houston [14 th Dist.] March 27, 2007, no pet.) (breach of con…
Rule Authority · Tex. App.
See, e.g., Tully, 173 S.W.3d at 216 ; Dulong v. Citibank (South Dakota), N.A., 261 S.W.3d 890, 893 (Tex.App.–Dallas 2008, no pet.); Butler v. Hudson & Keyse, L.L.C., No. 14-07-00534-CV, 2009 WL 402329 , at *3 5 (Tex.App.–Houston [14th Dist.] Feb. 19, 2009, no pet.) (mem. op.) (all applying common- law cause of action for “account stated”); Rowlands v. Unifund CCR, No. 14-05-01122-CV, 2007 WL 1395101 , *2 (Tex.App.–Houston [14th Dist.] March 27, 2007, no pet.) (breach of cont…
Rule Authority · Tex. App.
See, e.g., Tully, 173 S.W.3d at 216 ; Dulong v. Citibank (South Dakota), N.A. , 261 S.W.3d 890, 893 (Tex.App.–Dallas 2008, no pet.) ; Butler v. Hudson & Keyse, L.L.C ., No. 14-07-00534-CV, 2009 WL 402329 , at *3 (Tex.App.–Houston [14th Dist.] Feb. 19, 2009, no pet.) (mem. op.) (all applying common-law cause of action for “account stated”); Rowlands v. Unifund CCR, No. 14-05-01122-CV, 2007 WL 1395101 , *2 (Tex.App.–Houston [14 th Dist.] March 27, 2007, no pet.) (breach of con…
Rule Authority · Tex. App.
See, e.g., Tully, 173 S.W.3d at 216 ; Dulong v. Citibank (South Dakota), N.A. , 261 S.W.3d 890, 893 (Tex.App.–Dallas 2008, no pet.) ; Butler v. Hudson & Keyse, L.L.C ., No. 14-07-00534-CV, 2009 WL 402329 , at *3 (Tex.App.–Houston [14th Dist.] Feb. 19, 2009, no pet.) (mem. op.) (all applying common-law cause of action for “account stated”); Rowlands v. Unifund CCR, No. 14-05-01122-CV, 2007 WL 1395101 , *2 (Tex.App.–Houston [14 th Dist.] March 27, 2007, no pet.) (breach of con…
Cited · Tex. App. · signal: see · 2 citations in this opinion
See Dulong v. Citibank (S.D.), N.A., 261 S.W.3d 890 , 893 n.3 (Tex. App.—Dallas 2008, no pet.).
Cited · Tex. App. · signal: see · 2 citations in this opinion
See Dulong v. Citibank (S.D.), N.A., 261 S.W.3d 890, 893 (Tex.App.-Dallas 2008, no pet.).
Cited · Tex. App. · signal: see · 2 citations in this opinion
See Dulong v. Citibank (South Dakota), N.A., 261 S.W.3d 890, 893 (Tex.App.-Dallas 2008, no pet.).
Cited · Tex. App. · signal: see
See Dulong v. Citibank (S. Dakota), N.A., 261 S.W.3d 890, 893 (Tex. App.—Dallas 2008, no pet.) (demonstrating an objection to affidavits on the basis the affiant lacks personal knowledge or on the basis it fails to comply with business records exception to hearsay rule must be preserved in the trial court); see also TEX.
Cited · Tex. App. · signal: see
See Dulong v. Citibank (S. Dakota), N.A., 261 S.W.3d 890, 893 (Tex. App.—Dallas 2008, no pet.) (demonstrating an objection to affidavits on the basis the affiant lacks personal knowledge or on the basis it fails to comply with business records exception to hearsay rule must be preserved in the trial court); see also TEX.
Cited · Tex. App. · signal: see
See Compton v. Citibank (S.D.), N.A., 364 S.W.3d 415 , 417–18 (Tex. App.—Dallas 2012, no pet.) (citing Dulong v. Citibank (S.D.), N.A., 261 S.W.3d 890, 893 (Tex. App.—Dallas 2008, no pet.)). 12 Hwang also erroneously argues that Capital One abandoned its account-stated claim at trial, but it presented evidence in support of that claim and argued in closing that it had proved that claim. 8 A. Standard of Review A trial court’s findings of fact have the same force and dignity …
Cited · Tex. App. · signal: see
See Dulong v. Citibank (S.D.), N.A., 261 S.W.3d 890, 893 (Tex. App.—Dallas 2008, no pet.).
Cited · Tex. App. · signal: see
We agree with the Dallas Court of Appeals that time records are not an indispensible element in the calculation of reasonable attorney’s fees. 15 Circle Ridge also complains about the failure to segregate attorney’s fees. 13 This objection was made in its response, but we have not been directed to where Circle Ridge obtained a ruling to preserve error on this issue. 14 Cont’l Dredging, Inc. v. De-Kaizered, Inc., 120 S.W.3d 380, 397 (Tex. App.—Texarkana 2003, pet. denied); se…