Extended Search
Generic filters
Exact matches only
Search in title
Search in content
Search in excerpt
Search in comments
Filter by Custom Post Type
Extended Search
Generic filters
Exact matches only
Search in title
Search in content
Search in excerpt
Search in comments
Filter by Custom Post Type

Conoco, Inc. v. Amarillo Nat’l Bank – Case Brief Summary (Texas)

In Conoco, Inc. v. Amarillo Nat'l Bank, 14 S.W.3d 325 (Tex. App.--Amarillo 2000, no pet.), Conoco acted both as a supplier and a provider of credit card processing and collection services to Centergas, a wholesaler and retailer of petroleum products.

Conoco set off the amount it owed Centergas for credit card sales against Centergas's debt to Conoco for the purchase of inventory. Id. at 327.

As part of a loan agreement, Amarillo National Bank had taken a security interest in Centergas's accounts receivable, which was duly perfected and continued. Id.

After Centergas filed for bankruptcy, the bank brought an action against Conoco, alleging conversion of accounts receivable in the form of the credit card proceeds that were part of the bank's collateral under the loan agreement with Centergas. Id.

On appeal, the court held that the bank's suit was barred by the statute of limitations because the bank knew, or should have known, that Conoco had been offsetting accounts receivable against Centergas' debt. Id. at 329.