Legal Opinion
Copystatics, Inc. v. Bourn
Court of Appeals of Texas
Decided June 18, 1985No. 9349PublishedCited by 8 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
CORNELIUS, Chief Justice.
Copystatics appeals from a default judgment, arguing that the judgment should be set aside because the plaintiff failed to allege the requirements of substituted service contained in Article 2031b, Tex.Rev. Civ.Stat.Ann. (Vernon 1964). We agree and reverse the judgment.
Bourn filed suit against Copystatics, Inc. as successor in interest to Saxon Business Products, alleging that Saxon fraudulently induced him into a dealer contract knowing that Saxon intended to go bankrupt, and that as a result he suffered a loss of profits and other damages.
As prerequisite to…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- McKanna v. EdgarTexas Supreme Court · 1965
- Cates v. PonCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1983
- Gourmet, Inc. v. HurleyCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1977
- Public Storage Properties, VII, Ltd. v. RankinCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1984
- Woodcock, Cummings, Taylor & French, Inc. v. CrosswellCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1971
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by8 opinions
- McGraw-Hill, Inc. v. Futrell, Texas Court of Appeals, 1st District (Houston)1992
- Frazier v. Dikovitsky, Texas Court of Appeals, 6th District (Texarkana)2004
- Lozano v. Hayes Wheels International, Inc., Texas Court of Appeals, 13th District1996
- Rivers v. Viskozki, Texas Court of Appeals, 11th District (Eastland)1998
- Onnela v. Medina, Texas Court of Appeals, 13th District1990
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.