Legal Opinion

Cheek v. W. H. Nicholson Co.

Court of Appeals of Texas

Decided April 1, 1912PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtMcMEANS, J.

The statement of the nature and result of the suit made by appellant in his brief, and assented to by appel-lees as being correct, is adopted in substance.

This is an action ex contractu, brought by J. R. Cheek, plaintiff, to recover from WH. Nicholson & Co. defendants, one rotary-, drilling rig and certain land, the said drilling rig and land being, by the uncontradicted evidence, of the total value of $3,000, the said rotary drilling rig and land having been promised to plaintiff, Cheek, by defendants as a commission for selling certain land and oil well property for defendants W. H.…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Reiter-Connolly Mfg. Co. v. HamlinSupreme Court of Alabama · 1906
  2. Sittig v. BirkestackCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1873
  3. Eldridge v. HawleyMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1874
  4. Cheek v. NicholsonCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1910
  5. Chicago & Eastern Illinois Railroad v. ZappIllinois Supreme Court · 1904

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Board of Regents of the University of Texas v. S & G Construction Co.Court of Appeals of Texas · 1975
  2. Southern Underwriters v. KellyCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1937
  3. James A. Dick Co. v. YanezCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1932
  4. Drake v. WallsCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1961
  5. Gotoskey v. GrawunderCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1913

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API