Sam v. Hochstadler Bros.
Texas Supreme Court
Appeal from Harris. Tried below before Hon. James Masterson. Suit by appellant, filed on the 7th of August, 1887, upon and for breach of a contract, dated October 10, 1885. The residence of appellees is alleged to be in the State of Hew York, and notices were served on them in that State under article 1230 of the Revised Statutes.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Harris. Tried below before Hon. James Masterson. Suit by appellant, filed on the 7th of August, 1887, upon and for breach of a contract, dated October 10, 1885. The residence of appellees is alleged to be in the State of Hew York, and notices were served on them in that State under article 1230 of the Revised Statutes. An attachment was sued out and the writ levied upon property in Harris County, but as the question does not arise on this appeal it is unnecessary to further notice it. At the October Term, 1887, the defendants filed a motion to quash the service on a plea in…
1Opinion of the Court
COLLABD, Judge.
When this ease was before the court on former appeal the only question then presented and discussed was the one of attachment and jurisdiction obtained by the levy and seizure thereunder. The attachment failing, it was held that the jurisdiction depending thereon failed, and the cause was reversed and remanded.
It now appears that defendants below appeared by motion to quash the service on them made in New York, at the October Term of the court, 1887; that the motion was heard and sustained by the court, and the cause continued, and defendants allowed until the next term to…
2Cited by7 opinions
- State v. Standard Oil Co.Texas Supreme Court · 1937
- Devereaux v. RoweCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1927
- Grizzard v. BrownCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1893
- N. K. Fairbanks & Co. v. BlumCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1893
- Roberts v. BludworthCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1927
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.