Legal Opinion

Kirby v. Dilworth & Marshall

Texas Commission of Appeals

Decided April 2, 1924No. 470-4019PublishedCited by 26 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtHamilton, J.

The statement of the case made by the Court of Civil Appeals is adopted by us, and follows: ’

“The facts in this case material to our conclusion are that the appellee, A. H. Kirby, was duly appointed, by the district court of the Seventeenth judicial district of Tarrant county, receiver of the property of the Equitable Company, Inc., and as such took possession thereof. The property consisted in part of several hundred town lots in the city of San Antonio. Thereafter, on the - day of March, 1923, Messrs. Dilworth & Marshall, a firm of attorneys in San Antonio, filed suit in the Seventy-Third…

2Cases cited13 opinions

  1. Heidritter v. Elizabeth Oil-Cloth Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1884
  2. Dillingham v. RussellTexas Supreme Court · 1889
  3. Ellis v. Vernon Ice, Light, & Water Co.Texas Supreme Court · 1893
  4. Clifton v. FosterMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1869
  5. Paine v. CarpenterCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1908

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

3Cited by26 opinions

  1. First Southern Properties, Inc. v. ValloneTexas Supreme Court · 1976
  2. McCurdy v. GageTexas Commission of Appeals · 1934
  3. Lubbock Hotel Co. v. Guaranty Bank & Trust Co.Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1935
  4. McCurdy v. GageTexas Supreme Court · 1934
  5. Wheeler v. WilliamsTexas Supreme Court · 1958

21 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