Legal Opinion

Otto Heinze & Co. v. Marx

Court of Appeals of Texas

Decided October 25, 1893No. 50PublishedCited by 5 opinions

Tried below before Hon. John L. Sheppard.

1Opinion of the Court

FINLEY, Associate Justice.

This is an action for the trial of the right to property. The original affidavit and claim bond were destroyed by the burning of the court house of Bowie Count)', and have been substituted by an order of the court. On August 29, 1887, Leon & H. Blum instituted suit by attachment in the District Court of Galveston County, against Munzesheimer & Klein, for $19,774.60, and on the same day M. Marx instituted his suit in the District Court of Galveston County, against the same defendants, by attachment, for $20,000, and on the same day Marx instituted another suit in the…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Moller v. . TuskaNew York Court of Appeals · 1881
  2. Young & Conant Manufacturing Co. v. WakefieldMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1876
  3. Powers v. . BenedictNew York Court of Appeals · 1882
  4. Medlin v. WilkinsTexas Supreme Court · 1883

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Kearney Milling & Elevator Co. v. Union Pacific Railway Co.Supreme Court of Iowa · 1896
  2. Guinn v. LokeyTexas Supreme Court · 1952
  3. Hubbs v. MarshallCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1915
  4. Fulcher v. HallCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1942
  5. Hubbs v. MarshallCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1915

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API