Legal Opinion

Exporters' & Traders' Compress & Warehouse Co. v. Schulze

Texas Commission of Appeals

Decided October 15, 1924No. 573-4036PublishedCited by 41 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtChapman, J.

Prior to November IS, 1920, defendant in error, Gus Schulze, had delivered to plaintiff in error, hereafter called warehouse company, 19 bales of cotton for storage. Upon receipt of each bale of cotton the warehouse company delivered to Schulze a receipt, in which it agreed to redeliver the cotton to the legal holder of the receipt, or pay market value therefor, acts of Providence or fire damage excepted. November 18, 1920, while the cotton was In the warehouse it was totally destroyed by fire. Schulze brought suit against the warehouse company for the value of the cotton and alleged the…

2Cases cited12 opinions

  1. Claflin v. . MeyerNew York Court of Appeals · 1878
  2. Railroad Co. v. ReevesSupreme Court of the United States · 1870
  3. Stone v. CaseSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1912
  4. E. O. Stanard Milling Co. v. White Line Central Transit Co.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1894
  5. Wilson v. Southern Pacific RailroadCalifornia Supreme Court · 1882

7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by41 opinions

  1. Buchanan v. ByrdTexas Supreme Court · 1975
  2. Trammell v. WhitlockTexas Supreme Court · 1951
  3. Wichita City Lines, Inc. v. PuckettTexas Supreme Court · 1956
  4. McAshan v. CavittTexas Supreme Court · 1950
  5. England v. Lyon Fireproof Storage Co.California Court of Appeal · 1928

36 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