Legal Opinion

Rockhold v. Lucky Tiger Oil Co.

Court of Appeals of Texas

Decided December 7, 1927No. 2919. [fn*]PublishedCited by 16 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

HALL, O. J.

In their briefs, the parties are unable to agree as to what constitutes a correct statement of the nature and result of this suit. This is due to the fact that there is much confusion in the preparation of the transcript, and the further fact that both parties have utterly disregarded District and County Court Rules 3-13, inclusive, in the preparation of their original pleadings as well as in the amended and supplemental pleadings. • Said rules provide that original pleadings shall be indorsed, so as to show their respective, positions in the process of pleading, and that in filing…

2Cases cited42 opinions

  1. Glenn v. Dallas County Bois D'Arc Island Levee DistrictTexas Supreme Court · 1925
  2. Shields v. HuntTexas Supreme Court · 1876
  3. Lewis v. AlexanderTexas Supreme Court · 1879
  4. Houston & Texas Central Railroad v. ParkerTexas Supreme Court · 1911
  5. Koenigheim v. MilesTexas Supreme Court · 1886

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

3Cited by16 opinions

  1. American Nat. Bank of Beaumont v. WingateCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1953
  2. Brigman v. Holt & BowersCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1930
  3. American Nat. Ins. Co. v. SchenckCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1935
  4. Wichita Falls Traction Co. v. McAbeeCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1929
  5. Brotherhood of Railroad Trainmen v. WoodCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1935

11 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