Legal Opinion

Matson v. Jarvis

Court of Appeals of Texas

Decided December 17, 1910PublishedCited by 14 opinions

Appeal from the District Court of Hill County. Tried below before Hon. W. C. Wear.

1Opinion of the Court

TALBOT, Associate Justice.

This is the third appeal in this case. See 94 S. W., 1079, and 113 S. W., 326. The suit is one for contribution. There is no controversy over the pleadings, and the material facts, among others that will appear in the discussion of the assignments of error, are as follows: On the 21st day of October, 1902, E. Jarvis, the appellee herein, and J. V. Matson, J. M. Carroll and T. C. Morgan, the appellants, and Lee Frisby, W. B. Bounds, J. S. Davis, M. P. Harwood, Jim J ones, Jr., J. M. Peden, W. A. Putman and S. B. Boyd executed a written contract or bond payable to B.…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Park v. Heirs of GloverTexas Supreme Court · 1859
  2. Harper v. StroudTexas Supreme Court · 1874
  3. Grimstead v. BriggsSupreme Court of Iowa · 1857
  4. Jarvis v. MatsonCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1908
  5. Pelton v. PrescottSupreme Court of Iowa · 1862

2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by14 opinions

  1. Bohn v. Burton-Lingo Co.Court of Appeals of Texas · 1915
  2. Bolt v. State Savings Bank of ManchesterCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1915
  3. Taylor Const. Co. v. ClynchCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1946
  4. Fenn v. BoxwellCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1958
  5. Bills v. BillsCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1918

9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API