Legal Opinion

Schultz v. Harless

Court of Appeals of Texas

Decided July 21, 1954No. 5044PublishedCited by 16 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

McGILL, Justice.

This was a suit to recover damages for injury to a growing cotton crop during the year 1951, alleged to have been caused by a poison spray used for killing weeds, and alleged to have been allowed to drift onto the cotton. Appellees were plaintiffs and appellant defendant in the trial court. Trial was to- a jury and-on findings -favorable to plaintiffs judgment was rendered against defendant for $3,928.

Appellant has presented four points of appeal, three of which urge error in the improper admission of evidence, and one in the improper submission of a special issue inquiring as…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. City of Amarillo v. WareTexas Supreme Court · 1931
  2. International & Great Northern Railroad v. PapeTexas Supreme Court · 1889
  3. Texas & St. Louis R. R. Co. v. YoungTexas Supreme Court · 1883
  4. City of Austin v. HowardCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1941
  5. Twin City Fire Ins. Co. v. TurnbowCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1939

3Cited by16 opinions

  1. McMillen Feeds, Inc. of Texas v. HarlowCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1966
  2. Matthew W. Dietz and T. J. Yancey v. Consolidated Oil & Gas, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1981
  3. International Harvester Company v. KeseyTexas Supreme Court · 1974
  4. Cutler Cranberry Co. v. Oakdale Electric CooperativeWisconsin Supreme Court · 1977
  5. Sun Pipe Line Co., Inc. v. KirkpatrickCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1974

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