Logourl black
From our private database of 13,000+ case briefs...

Ling and Co. v. Trinity Sav. And Loan Ass'n

Supreme Court of Texas
482 S.W.2d 841 (1972)


Facts

Bruce Bowman (defendant) owed money on a promissory note to Trinity Savings and Loan Association (plaintiff). Bowman pledged a certificate for 1,500 shares of common stock in Ling & Company, Inc. (defendant) to secure payment on the note. Ling was formerly a brokerage house member of the New York Stock Exchange. Trinity brought suit against Bowman to collect on the balance owed on the promissory note, and to foreclose on the stock certificate pledged as security. Ling objected to the foreclosure and public sale of the stock based on restrictions on transferring stock set out in Ling’s articles of incorporation. The articles require a stockholder to obtain written approval from the New York Stock Exchange, and to give the corporation and other stockholders an opportunity to purchase, prior to selling or encumbering the stock. No offer of sale was made to other stockholders, and Bowman’s pledge of stock was not approved by the New York Stock Exchange. Bowman’s stock certificate refers on its face to restrictions that are described on its reverse side. On the certificate’s reverse side, it refers to the provisions in the articles of incorporation that restrict any transfer or encumbrance without first offering an option to purchase the shares to the corporation and other stockholders. Trinity claimed that the restrictions on the transfer of stock contained in Ling’s articles are invalid. The trial court granted summary judgment for Trinity, foreclosed the security interest in the stock, and ordered the stock sold. The court of appeals affirmed, holding that the restrictions included in Ling’s articles were invalid because there was no conspicuous notice of them on the stock certificate, and because the restrictions on stock transfer were unreasonable.

Rule of Law

The rule of law is the black letter law upon which the court rested its decision. To access this section, start your 7-day free trial of Quimbee for Law Students.

Issue

The issue section includes the dispositive legal issue in the case phrased as a question. To access this section, start your 7-day free trial of Quimbee for Law Students.

Holding and Reasoning (Reavley, J.)

The holding and reasoning section includes:

  • A “yes” or “no” answer to the question framed in the issue section;
  • A summary of the majority or plurality opinion, using the CREAC method; and
  • The procedural disposition (e.g. reversed and remanded, affirmed, etc.).

To access this section, start your 7-day free trial of Quimbee for Law Students.

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 97,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Vanderbilt, Berkeley, and the University of Illinois—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students. Read our student testimonials.

  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students. Read more about Quimbee.

Here's why 129,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 13,000 briefs, keyed to 177 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
  • The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
  • Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
  • Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.