Case law

Ross v. Brown

491 S.W.2d 690 · Court of Appeals of Texas · Feb 8, 1973

Bender v. Damon, 72 Tex. 92 , 9 S.W. 747 ; Wilson v. Aultman & Taylor Co., 39 S.W. 1103 (Tex.Civ.App., 1897, n. w. h.); State National Bank of Dallas v. Hathaway, 61 S.W. 525 (Tex.Civ.App.1901, n. w. h.) ; Houghton v. … Nutt v. Curles, 418 S.W.2d 327 (Tex.Civ. App. Austin, 1967, writ ref’d. n. r. e.).

Brown v. Tieman

239 S.W.2d 156 · Court of Appeals of Texas · Apr 11, 1951

Brown, doing business as Capitol Butane Gas Company of Travis County, Texas. Appellee recovered judgment. … Co. v. Ballew, Tex.Com.App., 66 S.W.2d 659 .

Brown v. Powell

508 S.W.2d 691 · Court of Appeals of Texas · Apr 17, 1974

His passengers were Stephen Brown and James Robison. … McPhearson v. Sullivan, supra; Harbin v. Seale, supra; Fancher v. Caldwell, 159 Tex. 8 , 314 S.W. 2d 820 (1958). This accident occurred at night.

Brown v. Mataska

262 S.W. 932 · Court of Appeals of Texas · May 3, 1924

Brown recovered a judgment in the justice court against Chas. … I was still county clerk when the application for certiorari in the case of Brown v. Mataska was filed in the county court. My file mark appears upon the application for writ of certiorari.

Brown v. Roland

11 Tex. Civ. App. 648 · Court of Appeals of Texas · Nov 23, 1895

In Moody v. … In Eylar v.

Brown v. Green

204 S.W. 357 · Court of Appeals of Texas · Jun 6, 1918

Brown, in the justice court for the sum of $196.90 and a foreclosure of the mortgage lien upon several head of stock. Mrs. J. M. Brown áppears to have been a party to that suit. … Turner & Bro. v. Gable, 195 S. W. 348 , recently decided by this court; Hrancky v. Sell, 199 S. W. 315 ; Reeves v. Faris, 186 S.

Stark v. Brown

210 S.W. 811 · Court of Appeals of Texas · Mar 10, 1919

In support of this rule, he cites the following Texas cases: Stafford v. King, 30 Tex. 257 , 94 Am. Dec. 304 ; Cullers v. Platt, 81 Tex. 258 , 16 S. W. 1003 ; Tate v. Betts, 97 S. W. 707 . In Tate v. … In Waldin v. Smith, 76 Iowa, 652 , 39 N.

Morris v. Brown

173 S.W. 265 · Court of Appeals of Texas · Jan 21, 1915

Answer: Yes. “(2) Had plaintiff Brown, prior to the dismissal of the suit of Morris v. … Co. v. Pennington, 166 S.

Brown v. Cooper

10 Tex. Civ. App. 512 · Court of Appeals of Texas · May 15, 1895

See also the following cases there cited: Durham v. Mussleman (Ind.), 18 Am. Dec., 133 ; Sisk v. Graham, 112 Ind., 504 ; 2 Am. St. Rep., 213 . … It will be noted that, both in the case of Worthington v. Wade, 82 Texas, 26 , and in that of Mudgett v.

Teel v. Brown

185 S.W. 319 · Court of Appeals of Texas · Feb 5, 1916

Ry. v. Word, 51 Tex. Civ. App. 206 , 111 S.W. 753 ; Jordan v. Johnson, 155 S.W. 1194 . … Ry. v. Seale, 89 S.W. 997 ; De Perez v. Everett, 73 Tex. 431 , 11 S.W. 388 .

McAdams v. Brown

422 S.W.2d 749 · Court of Appeals of Texas · Dec 7, 1967

The jury found that the plaintiff, V. C. Brown, was employed under a general agreement to represent defendant, John C. McAdams, in various matters without any agreement as to time and mode of payment. … This rule is supported in Texas by numerous cases, including: Jones, Adm’r v. Lewis, 11 Tex. 359 (1854); Montgomery v. Brown, 31 S.W. 1084 (Tex.Civ.App., 1895); Stark v.

Brown v. Coates

420 S.W.2d 822 · Court of Appeals of Texas · Oct 19, 1967

Brown sued Susie Coates and E. B. Wagner on an oral contract between Brown and Wagner for services rendered by Brown in clearing for cultivation approximately 300 acres of the land included in the lease. … Sheffield v. Nobles, Tex.Civ.App., 378 S.W.2d 391 , wr. ref.

Morris v. Brown

337 S.W.2d 759 · Court of Appeals of Texas · Jun 17, 1960

V. Brown for damages alleged to have been caused by Brown’s negligence while hauling plaintiff’s cattle. … were delivered to Brown; (2) that Morris permitted the cattle that died to be loaded on Brown’s truck when they were not in a condition to make the trip; (3) that Morris was negligent in permitting such cattle to be transported

Brown v. Brown

155 S.W. 551 · Court of Appeals of Texas · Mar 26, 1913

It was alleged that appellant had assumed payment of the accounts against Brown & McWhorter and W. L. Brown & Co. … Lemmon v. Box, 20 Tex. 329 ; Wallace v. Freeman, 25 Tex. Supp. 91 ; Muller v. Riviere, 59 Tex. 640 , 46 Am. Rep. 291 ; Spann v. Cochran, 63 Tex. 240 ; Morris v. Gaines, 82 Tex. 255 , 17 S.

Bradford v. Brown

37 Tex. Civ. App. 323 · Court of Appeals of Texas · Nov 30, 1904

Bass v. Mitchell, 22 Texas, 293 ; Stafford v. King, 30 Texas, 257 ; Meyer v. Hale, 23 S. W. Rep., 990 ; Clayton v. Rhem, 67 Texas, 53 . … George Brown.

Brown v. Arhelger

198 S.W. 811 · Court of Appeals of Texas · Nov 14, 1917

Joab Brown, appellant, became indebted to them and executed his note for said amount, which was payable to G. A. Arhelger alone. Brown paid part of the *812 note, and was sued for the balance. … Thompson v. Cartwright, 1 Tex. 87 , 46 Am. Dec. 95 ; Wimbish v. Holt, 26 Tex. 673 ; Brown v. Chenoworth, 51 Tex. 477 ; Allison v. Insurance Co., 87 Tex. 593 , 30 S. W. 547 ; Cleveland v.

Denton v. Brown

634 S.W.2d 386 · Court of Appeals of Texas · Jun 3, 1982

Frontier Mobile Homes v. Meadows, Tex.Civ.App. (Waco) 531 S.W.2d 240 . … Middlebrook v. David Bradley Mfg. Co., 86 Tex. 706 , 26 S.W. 935 .

Harrison v. Brown

416 S.W.2d 613 · Court of Appeals of Texas · May 18, 1967

Bergin v. Bergin, 159 Tex. 83 , 315 S.W.2d 943, at 946 (1958); McMurray v. Stanley, 69 Tex. 227 , 6 S.W. 412 (1887). … Kelly v.

Kamleh v. Brown

389 S.W.2d 513 · Court of Appeals of Texas · Mar 25, 1965

The Harris County Probation Department, acting through Jo Ann Brown, filed this case, to declare Amal Kamleh a dependent and neglected child. … Jones v. Davis, Tex.Civ.App., 203 S.W.2d 943 , n. r. e.; Smith v. Curtis, Tex.Civ.App., 223 S.W.2d 712 , n. w. h. All of appellant’s points and contentions are overruled. Affirmed.

Angelo v. Brown

139 S.W.2d 197 · Court of Appeals of Texas · Mar 28, 1940

Brown, Chief of Police, and E. H. … Atty. v. Conklin, supra; Ex parte Sterling, 122 Tex. 108 , 53 S.W.2d 294 ; Box v. Newsom, Tex.Civ.App., 43 S.W.2d 981 . In the instant case, appellant does not attack the validity of said Article 613.