Legal Opinion

Hardcastle v. Sibley

Court of Appeals of Texas

Decided June 17, 1937No. 3534PublishedCited by 10 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

WALTHALL, Justice.

Appellees accept the statement of the nature and result of the suit as in appellants’ brief as substantially correct. The trial court refused to allow interest upon the several sums of money involved, and appellees, as to the claim for interest, present a counter assignment of error.

Appellants’ statement of the suit, which we adopt, is substantially as follows:

This is an appeal by Walter C. Hardcastle and Douglas C. Crowell, executors of the estate of Madeleine C. Wood, deceased, from a judgment of the district court of El Paso county, Tex., Forty-first judicial district,…

2Cases cited14 opinions

  1. Houston & Texas Central Railroad v. KeelingTexas Supreme Court · 1909
  2. Moss & Raley v. WrenTexas Supreme Court · 1909
  3. Bowen v. LansingMichigan Supreme Court · 1901
  4. Ametrano v. . DownsNew York Court of Appeals · 1902
  5. Richardson v. McCloskeyTexas Supreme Court · 1925

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

3Cited by10 opinions

  1. Toledo Society for Crippled Children v. HickokTexas Supreme Court · 1953
  2. Zapata County v. LlanosCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1951
  3. Simmons v. O'ConnorCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1941
  4. Parson v. Wolfe, Texas Court of Appeals, 7th District (Amarillo)1984
  5. Balderrama v. Pride Industries, Inc.District Court, W.D. Texas · 2013

5 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