Legal Opinion

Caterpillar Tractor Co. v. Churchill

Court of Appeals of Texas

Decided June 17, 1931No. 3970Published

1Opinion of the CourtWillson, C. J.

(after stating the case as above).

Unless the. notes on which the claim presented by appellant to appellee as administra-trix was based had been effectively renewed when so presented, they were'barred by the statute of limitations of four years, and the administratrix acted within her rights and in the discharge of her duty when she rejected the claim. Article 5527, R. S. 1925; Howard v. Johnson, 69 Tex. 655, 7 S. W. 522; Jackson v. Stone (Tex. Civ. App.) 155 S. W. 960.

It appeared in the evidence (1) that on January 19, 1927, E. E. Churchill wrote the holder of the notes a letter in which he…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Howard Hume, Administrators, Etc. v. WindomTexas Supreme Court · 1894
  2. Elsby v. LunaTexas Commission of Appeals · 1929
  3. Howard v. JohnsonTexas Supreme Court · 1888
  4. Jackson v. StoneCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1913

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

Powered by the Exa API