with the conditions specified in the credit." 6 . It appears that National Union first learned of the defendants' possible defenses to payment when counsel for defendant Stephen P. Walker, III wrote it on July 22, 1985, stating “National Union, together with the General Partners and the Bank, is liable for the Walkers' rescission of their purchase of the Interest due to National Union's participation in an offering of securities in violation of state and federal securities laws." Exhibit H to affidavit of Jeffrey M. Duban, Esq. sworn to February 2, 1989. 7 . Accordingly, National Union’s motion for summary judgment on its claim for reimbursement under the indemnification agreements is also denied. 8 .Cf. Brazos River Authority v. Carr, 405 S.W.2d 689, 695-697 (Tex.Sup.Ct.1966) (<HOLDING>) 9 . Cf. U.C.C. 3.805 (“This chapter applies to
holding that the maximum statutory damages available to plaintiffs under the fdcpa is limited to 100000 per plaintiff per proceeding recognizing that taxpayers are not entitled to interest on cash bonds holding that in computing the present worth of such future payments same should have been discounted to their present worth at the date of judgment at 6 per cent interest per annum holding that change of statutory interest rate on judgments from six to ten percent per annum affected a right or remedy under article iv section 34 holding that bonds that bore interest at one percent per annum plus on supplemental coupons up to 212 additional interest per annum to the extent net revenues are available were not negotiable instruments because the supplemental coupons indefinite interest rate failed to state a sum certain under section 3106