Case law

Robertson v. Trammell

98 Tex. 364 · Texas Supreme Court · Dec 22, 1904

BROWN, Associate Justice. … Chicago v. Babcock, 143 Ill., 358 , and see 58 L. R. A., 299, where the authorities are collected. Giving an indemnity bond to the railroad company did not change the character of the transaction.

Houston & Texas Central Railway Co. v. Davis

88 Tex. 593 · Texas Supreme Court · Nov 7, 1895

BROWN, Associate Justice. —The defendant in error, W. O. … In the case of Railway v.

Saint Louis Type Foundry v. International Live Stock, Printing & Publishing Co.

74 Tex. 651 · Texas Supreme Court · Oct 29, 1889

Clements v. Lacy, 51 Texas, 151 . So too it was held in Swearingen et al. v. … Stewart v. Brown, 37 N. Y., 350 , and cases cited in sec. 221, Freem. on Ex.

Hill v. Winn Dixie Texas, Inc.

849 S.W.2d 802 · Texas Supreme Court · Mar 31, 1993

See Hicks v. … Acord v.

Hensel v. Kegans

79 Tex. 347 · Texas Supreme Court · Jan 26, 1891

Since the case of Watrous v. McGrew, 16 Texas, 506 , it has been frequently referred to with approval. In Veramendi v. … Bullock v. Smith, 72 Texas, 549 ; Walet v. Haskins, 68 Texas, 418 . For the error indicated we think the judgment should be reversed and the cause remanded. Reversed and remanded.

Fort Worth & Rio Grande Railway Co. v. Southwestern Telegraph & Telephone Co.

96 Tex. 160 · Texas Supreme Court · Jan 8, 1903

The doctrine of the law upon which1 this contention is founded is thus very well stated by Justice Brown in Sabine & E. T. Railway Co. v. Gulf & I. … Co. v. Railway, 52 S. W. Rep., 107 ; Railway Co. v. Telegraph and Tel. Co., 52 S. W. Rep., 86 ; Railway Co. v. Postal Tel. Co., 52 S. W. Rep., 108 ; Railway Co. v. Postal Tel. Co., 45 S. W. Rep., 179 ; Railway Co. v.

Aig National Insurance Company v. East Side Surgery Center, Inc.

Texas Supreme Court · Apr 13, 2005

Shiely Thornton Summers Biechlin Dunham & Brown 10100 Reunion Place, Suite 200 San Antonio, TX 78216 Mr. James Sowder Thompson Coe Cousins & Irons, LLP 700 N. Pearl Street, 25th Floor Dallas, TX 75201-2832 Mr. … v. EAST SIDE SURGERY CENTER, INC., ET AL. Dear Counsel: The Supreme Court of Texas today abated the petition for review filed in the above-referenced case.

City of Austin v. Ritz

72 Tex. 391 · Texas Supreme Court · Dec 4, 1888

In the case of Klein v. … There must of necessity be a discretion lodged with the board as to such matters.

Davis v. McCray Refrigerator Sales Corp.

136 Tex. 296 · Texas Supreme Court · Apr 9, 1941

W. 531 ; Partridge v. Wooton, 137 S. W. 412 ; Brown v. Wofford, 167 S. W. 764 ; Nalle v. Harrell, 118 Texas 149 , 12 S. W. (2d) 550 . The appeal in this case was from an order entered on July 26, 1939. … Cooper v. Carter, 233 S. W. 1020 ; Burnette v. Miracle, 295 S. W. 214 ; Gilmore v. Ladell, 34 S. W. (2d) 919 ; Stinnett v. Dudley, 277 S. W. 801 ; Shields v. Amicable Life Insurance Co., 287 S.

Alamo Express, Inc. v. Union City Transfer

158 Tex. 234 · Texas Supreme Court · Jan 15, 1958

Brown Express, 106 S.W. 2d 327 , dism.; North East Texas Motor Lines, Inc. v. Texas & Pacific Motor Transport Co., 159 S.W. 2d 926 , no writ history; Texas Industrial Traffic League v. … Board of County Commissioners of Anne Arundel County v. Buch, 190 Md. 394 , 58 Atl. 2d 672; 5 A.L.R. 2d 569 ; Rich Mfg. Co. v. Petty, 241 Iowa 840 , 42 N.W. 2d 80 ; Southern Traffic Bureau v.

Gulf, Colorado & Santa Fe Railway Company v. Deen

159 Tex. 238 · Texas Supreme Court · Nov 19, 1958

DEEN v. HICKMAN. “Per Curiam: In Deen v. Gulf, Colorado & Santa Fe R. Co., 353 U.S. 925 , *240 (77 Sup. Ct. 715, 1 L. … The determination of that issue was foreclosed by Deen v. Gulf, Colorado & Santa Fe R. Co., supra.

Texas Employers' Insurance v. Hale

144 Tex. 432 · Texas Supreme Court · Jan 9, 1946

W. (2d) 430 , error refused; Brown Express, Inc. v. Henderson, 142 S. W. (2d) 585 , error dismissed, correct judgment; Miller v. Wyrick, 96 S. W. (2d) 253 . Those authorities support the holding. … Petitioner insists that those cases were, in effect, overruled by the later decision of this Court in Southern Pine Lumber Company v. King, 138 Texa,s 473, 161 S. W. (2d) 483 . This con *435 tention is not sustained.

Nelson v. Neal

787 S.W.2d 343 · Texas Supreme Court · May 16, 1990

State Banking Board v. Valley National Bank, 604 S.W.2d 415, 418 (Tex.Civ.App.—Austin 1980, writ ref'd n.r.e.). … Browning v. Placke, 698 S.W.2d 362, 363 (Tex.1985). Neal's failure to comply with the affidavit requirements did not, therefore, deprive the probate court of jurisdiction. Cf. Peek v.

Mansell v. Texas & Pacific Ry. Co.

135 Tex. 31 · Texas Supreme Court · Mar 20, 1940

By such amendment in Section 151 et seq., there was created the National Railway Adjustment Board. … “RULE V. “Any joint car Inspector discharged or suspended without being given an investigation will be returned to work and an investigation held.

West Disinfecting Co. v. Trustees of Crosby Independent School District

135 Tex. 492 · Texas Supreme Court · Oct 23, 1940

In Brown v. Fore (Com. App.) 12 S. … Mooers v. Hunter (Com. App.) 67 S. W. (2d) 860 ; Gulf C. & S. F. Ry. Co. v. Hamilton, 126 Texas 542 , 89 S. W. (2d) 208 ; Hollis v. Tarrant County, 129 Texas 176 , 102 S. W. (2d) 1055 .

Ford v. Panhandle & Santa Fe Railway Co.

151 Tex. 538 · Texas Supreme Court · Oct 1, 1952

This language was quoted with approval in an opinion written by Justice Brown in 1906 in the case of Houston & T. C. Ry. Co. vs. O’Donnell, 99 Tex. 636 , 92 S. W. 409, 410 . … Co. v. Brown, 142 Texas 385 , 181 S. W. 2d 68 .

Seibert v. Bergman

91 Tex. 411 · Texas Supreme Court · Jan 24, 1898

BROWN, Associate Justice. … Prescott v. Trueman, 4 Mass., 629 ; Andrews v. Davidson, 17 N. H., 413; 43 Am. Dec., 606 ; Moore v. Merrill, 17 N. H., 75; 43 Am. Dec., 593 ; Funk v. Vonieda, 11 Serg. & R., 110; 14 Am. Dec., 617 ; Reed v.

Herring v. Houston National Exchange Bank

114 Tex. 394 · Texas Supreme Court · Mar 4, 1925

Heil v. United States, 273 Fed. Rep., 729; Commonwealth Finance Corporation v. Landis, 261 Fed. Rep., 440; Sloan Shipyards Corporation v. United States Fleet Corporation, 258 U. S., 549 , 66 L. Ed., 762 . … The Board of Prison Commissioners is in no sense a corporation. It is purely an agency of government, a part of the government, performing no functions extra-governmental.

In Re Birdwell

43 Tex. Sup. Ct. J. 785 · Texas Supreme Court · May 25, 2000

See Duncan v. Board of Disciplinary Appeals, 898 S.W.2d 759, 761 (Tex.1995). … See Duncan v. Board of Disciplinary Appeals, 898 S.W.2d 759, 761 (Tex.1995); In re Humphreys, 880 S.W.2d 402, 408 (Tex.1994).

Gunn Infiniti, Inc. v. O'BYRNE

996 S.W.2d 854 · Texas Supreme Court · Aug 26, 1999

P. 278; Elbaor v. Smith, 845 S.W.2d 240, 243 (Tex.1992). A trial court may refuse to submit a question only if no evidence exists to warrant its submission. See Elbaor, 845 S.W.2d at 243 ; Brown v. … See Brown, 685 S.W.2d at 641—42; Phillips Pipeline Co. v. Richardson, 680 S.W.2d 43, 48 (Tex.App.—El Paso 1984, no writ). Mitigation, if raised by the evidence, is a fact question for the jury. See America W.