Legal Opinion

Burrow v. Zapp

Texas Supreme Court

Decided March 17, 1888No. 2446PublishedCited by 16 opinions

Appeal from Fayette. Tried below before the Hon. H. Teichmueller.

1Opinion of the Court

Stayton, Associate Justice.

To secure the purchase money of a tract of land sold by appellant to Kleiniek, the latter exe-*. cuted to the former his three negotiable notes, each for the sum* of two hundred dollars, one due January 1, 1884, another January 1, 1885, and the last January 1, 1886. A lien was expressly* retained on the land, and by the terms of the notes they were^ all to become due on failure to pay any one at its maturity. All the notes were transferred to the appellee by writings thereon,, which were alleged to have been signed by the appellant, and in words as follows:

“…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Reynolds v. DouglassSupreme Court of the United States · 1838
  2. Fisher v. Phelps, Dodge & Co.Texas Supreme Court · 1858
  3. Belverman v. StateTexas Supreme Court · 1856
  4. Farmers & Mechanics Bank v. KerchevalMichigan Supreme Court · 1853

3Cited by16 opinions

  1. Davis v. DavisCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1899
  2. Austin v. Guaranty State Bank of CopperasCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1927
  3. Drinkard v. JenkinsCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1918
  4. Norton v. WochlerCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1903
  5. Slaughter v. MortonCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1916

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