Legal Opinion
Boreham v. Hartsell
Texas Court of Appeals, 5th District (Dallas)
Decided March 3, 1992No. 05-91-00813-CVPublishedCited by 20 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
BAKER, Justice.
Howard B. Boreham claims a default judgment the trial court rendered against him for Jay Hartsell is void. He contends the trial court did not have personal jurisdiction over him. He alleges seven points of error. The first point contends Hartsell did not strictly comply with the requirements of the Texas Civil Practice and Remedies Code 1 for service upon nonresident defendants. We agree. We reverse and remand this cause for a new trial.
PROCEDURAL HISTORY
Hartsell sued Boreham on a promissory note. Hartsell alleged Boreham was an individual resident of California who had…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Morgan v. Compugraphic Corp.Texas Supreme Court · 1984
- McKanna v. EdgarTexas Supreme Court · 1965
- Uvalde Country Club v. Martin Linen Supply Co.Texas Supreme Court · 1985
- Whitney v. L & L REALTY CORPORATIONTexas Supreme Court · 1973
- Capitol Brick, Inc. v. Fleming Manufacturing Co.Texas Supreme Court · 1986
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by20 opinions
- Leedo Cabinetry v. James Sales & Distribution, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1998
- Mobilevision Imaging Services, L.L.C. v. Lifecare Hospitals of North Texas, L.P., Texas Court of Appeals, 5th District (Dallas)2008
- Wachovia Bank of Delaware, National Ass'n v. GilliamTexas Supreme Court · 2007
- Whiskeman v. Lama, Texas Court of Appeals, 8th District (El Paso)1993
- World Distributors, Inc. v. Knox, Texas Court of Appeals, 8th District (El Paso)1998
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.