Bank of America, N.A. v. Haag, 37 S.W.3d 55 (Tex. App.—San Antonio 2000, no pet.).
Depositor opened a trust account naming Son as
the beneficiary. When the bank was purchased by another bank, the trust
account nature of the account was somehow overlooked and the account was
entered into the bank’s records as a joint account. Son withdrew all the
funds from the account. Depositor sued the bank. The trial court held
that Son’s withdrawal was unauthorized and that Depositor was entitled
to the return of his money.
The appellate court affirmed. The court rejected the bank’s argument
that it was entitled to rely on the account statements which showed the
account as being joint. Account statements are not the operative legal
document that created the account. Instead, the signature card contains
the terms of the agreement. Because the bank could not produce the
signature card, the court allowed Depositor to testify as to the terms
of the contract. Depositor was not estopped for not complaining about
the form of the account statements because Depositor was under no duty
to point out the inconsistency.
Moral: Attorneys should inspect the actual signature cards of
multiple-party accounts to make certain their clients fully understand
their rights. Reliance should not be placed on the client’s recollection
of the nature of the account or the description of the account on
account statements.