Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
15 Texas opinions name it 2 courts 1924–2016 0 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Texas courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
Hunter v. Fort Worth Capital Corp.green2 sentences1985The shareholders, directors, and officers shall' have power to take such corporate or other action as shall be appropriate to protect such remedy, right, or claim. [Emphasis added] Construing the legislative intent of article 7.12, the Hunter court said, “Because the statute applies to officers, directors, and shareholders of a dissolved corporation, it embodies the trust fund doctrine but only to the extent that the doctrine allows recovery for pre-dissolution claims.” 620 S.W.2d at 550-51 (emphasis added). 1984The trust fund doctrine was considered in Hunter v. Fort Worth Capital Corp., 620 S.W.2d 547 (Tex.1981). | 1 | 2 |
Lyons-Thomas Hardware Co. v. Perry Stove Manufacturing Co.green2 sentences1973The Texas Supreme Court in Lyons-Thomas Hardware Co. v. Perry Stove *629 Manuf’g Co., 86 Tex. 143 , 24 S.W. 16 (1893) held the trust fund doctrine to be the law of Texas. 1973The Texas Supreme Court in Lyons-Thomas Hardware Co. v. Perry Stove *629 Manuf’g Co., 86 Tex. 143 , 24 S.W. 16 (1893) held the trust fund doctrine to be the law of Texas. | 1 | 2 |
Kelly v. General Interior Construction, Inc.green2 sentences2015Kelly also concerned the personal jurisdiction over a nonresident corporate officer for a trust fund claim. 301 S.W.3d at 656–57. 2015See Kelly, 301 S.W.3d at 660–61. | 1 | 1 |
Spring Branch Independent School District v. Metalab Equipment Co.green2 sentences1986NOTES [1] Other doctrines besides disregarding the corporate fiction have been used in cases similar to this: fraudulent conveyance, Texas Sand Co. v. Shield, 381 S.W.2d 48, 52-53 (Tex. 1964) and Tex. Bus. & Comm. Code ch. 24 (Vernon Supp. 1986); the trust fund doctrine, Henry I. 1986Other doctrines besides disregarding the corporate fiction have been used in cases similar to this: fraudulent conveyance, Texas Sand Co. v. Shield, 381 S.W.2d 48, 52-53 (Tex.1964) and Tex. Bus. & Comm. Code ch. 24 (Vernon Supp. 1986); the trust fund doctrine, Henry 1. | 1 | 1 |
Bishop v. Schield Bantam Companygreen2 sentences1981See Bishop v. Schieid Bantam Co., 293 F.Supp. 94, 95 (N.D. 1981See Bishop v. Schield Bantam Co., 293 F.Supp. 94, 95 (N.D. | 1 | 1 |
Fagan v. La Gloria Oil and Gas Companygreen2 sentences1978Fagan v. La Gloria Oil & Gas Co., 494 S.W.2d 624, 632 (Tex.Civ.App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 1973, no writ). 1978Fagan v. La Gloria Oil & Gas Co., 494 S.W.2d 624, 632 (Tex.Civ.App.Houston [14th Dist.] 1973, no writ). | 1 | 1 |
Whisenhunt v. Park Lane Corp.green1 sentence1978The purpose behind the trust fund doctrine, according to another court, is "to prevent fraud upon creditors through removal of corporate assets that creditors had reasonably believed to be in the corporation." Whisenhunt v. Park Lane Corp., 418 F.Supp. 1096, 1098 (N.D.Tex.1976). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Texas. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Brenton & McKay v. Peck
green
2 sentences1951“A receivership can never be properly granted at the instance of a general creditor of a corporation until *328 the point has been reached in its affairs at which the trust-fund doctrine may be invoked by the creditors, and when that point is reached the statute applies.” Brenton & McKay v. Peck, 39 Tex.Civ.App. 224 , 87 S.W. 898, 902 ; Supervend Corp. v. Jones, Tex.Civ.App., 235 S.W.2d 707 . 1951“A receivership can never be properly granted at the instance of a general creditor of a corporation until *328 the point has been reached in its affairs at which the trust-fund doctrine may be invoked by the creditors, and when that point is reached the statute applies.” Brenton & McKay v. Peck, 39 Tex.Civ.App. 224 , 87 S.W. 898, 902 ; Supervend Corp. v. Jones, Tex.Civ.App., 235 S.W.2d 707 . | 3 | 1949–1951 |
Henry I. Siegel Co., Inc. v. Holliday
green
2 sentences1991Siegel, 663 S.W.2d at 827 . 1991Siegel, 663 S.W.2d at 827 . | 2 | 1986–1991 |
Provident Life & Accident Insurance Co. v. Knott
green
1 sentence2016And because we have determined that the trial court could have granted summary judgment for the Bank on the grounds that the funds were held in ordinary deposit accounts and that the trust fund doctrine does not apply, we need not address the Investors’ third issue complaining that the Bank’s reply brief addressed a different issue than the trust fund doctrine issue and thereby raised 11 a new summary judgment ground.4 See Knott, 128 S.W.3d at 216 ; Star- Telegram, Inc., 915 S.W.2d at 473 ; see also Tex. R. | 1 | 2016–2016 |
Star-Telegram, Inc. v. Doe
green
1 sentence2016And because we have determined that the trial court could have granted summary judgment for the Bank on the grounds that the funds were held in ordinary deposit accounts and that the trust fund doctrine does not apply, we need not address the Investors’ third issue complaining that the Bank’s reply brief addressed a different issue than the trust fund doctrine issue and thereby raised 11 a new summary judgment ground.4 See Knott, 128 S.W.3d at 216 ; Star- Telegram, Inc., 915 S.W.2d at 473 ; see also Tex. R. | 1 | 2016–2016 |
Castleberry v. Branscum
red
1 sentence1995Castleberry , 721 S.W.2d at 271 n.1. 26. | 1 | 1995–1995 |
Wortham v. Lachman-Rose Co.
green
2 sentences1978Wortham v. Lachman-Rose Co., 440 S.W.2d 351 (Tex.Civ.App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 1969, no writ). 1978Wortham v. Lachman-Rose Co., 440 S.W.2d 351 (Tex.Civ.App.Houston [1st Dist.] 1969, no writ). | 1 | 1978–1978 |
Corey v. Wadsworth
neutral
1 sentence1973At page 25 of that opinion the following language of Corey v. Wadsworth, 99 Ala. 68 , 11 So. 350 , 353 (1892) was quoted as a correct statement of the law on this subject: “ ‘At what stage of a corporation’s affairs must it be pronounced insolvent, so as to bring it within the principles we have declared? | 1 | 1973–1973 |
Supervend Corp. v. Jones
green
1 sentence1951“A receivership can never be properly granted at the instance of a general creditor of a corporation until *328 the point has been reached in its affairs at which the trust-fund doctrine may be invoked by the creditors, and when that point is reached the statute applies.” Brenton & McKay v. Peck, 39 Tex.Civ.App. 224 , 87 S.W. 898, 902 ; Supervend Corp. v. Jones, Tex.Civ.App., 235 S.W.2d 707 . | 1 | 1951–1951 |
Bank of De Soto v. Reed
green
2 sentences1930Section 110, paragraph (f), reads: “Upon the confirmation of a composition offered by a bankrupt, the title to his property shall thereupon revest in him.” Section 34: “The liability of a person who is the co-debtor with, or guarantor or in any manner a surety for, a bankrupt shall not be altered by the discharge of such bankrupt.” Appellant also cites the following from the opinion of the Court of Civil Appeals in Bank of De Soto v. Reed, 50 Tex. Civ. 1930Section 110, paragraph (f), reads: "Upon the confirmation of a composition offered by a bankrupt, the title to his property shall thereupon revest in him." Section 34: "The liability of a person who is the co-debtor with, or guarantor or in any manner a surety for, a bankrupt shall not be altered by the discharge of such bankrupt." Appellant also cites the following from the opinion of the Court of Civil Appeals in Bank of De Soto v. Reed, 50 Tex. Civ. | 1 | 1930–1930 |
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.