Legal Opinion
Hartford Accident & Indemnity Co. v. Farrell
Court of Appeals of Texas
Decided May 14, 1937No. 13546PublishedCited by 4 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
SPEER, Justice.
On January 12, 1931, by an order of the Ninety-Sixth district court of Tarrant county, Cullen W. Bailey was appointed receiver in a suit pending in that court, styled Edward Ertel v. Ertel Oil Properties, Inc. The order appointing the receiver required that he enter into bond in the sum of $5,000. This bond was duly filed with the Hartford Accident & Indemnity Company as surety thereon. Bailey resigned from the receivership on February 28, 1933.
R. R. Farrell instituted this suit on November 29, 1935, against Hartford Accident & Indemnity Company, hereinafter referred to as…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- Magruder v. DrurySupreme Court of the United States · 1914
- Jackson v. SmithSupreme Court of the United States · 1919
- Colbert v. Dallas Joint Stock Land BankTexas Supreme Court · 1937
- Williams v. Safety Casualty Co.Texas Supreme Court · 1937
- Northern Finance Corporation v. ByrnesCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1925
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- Mid-Continent Supply Co. v. ConwayCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1951
- Knox v. Damascus Corp.Court of Appeals of Texas · 1947
- Atlantic Refining Co. v. TidwellCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1958
- Mid-Continent Supply Co. v. ConwayCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1951