Legal Opinion
Daniel v. Goesl
Texas Supreme Court
Decided December 7, 1960No. A-7965PublishedCited by 65 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtJustice Culver
All of the parties before us in this cause are medical doctors and were members of a partnership formed for the practice of medicine. One of the provisions in the articles of partnership reads as follows:
“RESTRICTIONS ON RETIRING PARTNERS. If any partner retires from the partnership, unless the partnership is dissolved by mutual consent of all partners, said retiring partner shall not for a period of three (3) years after so retiring from the partnership practice medicine, or in any way be connected with any other person in the practice of medicine, directly or indirectly, in either Bowie…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- Texas Foundaries, Inc. v. International Molders & Foundry Workers UnionTexas Supreme Court · 1952
- Rosenbaum v. Texas Bldg. & Mortg. Co.Texas Commission of Appeals · 1943
- Rosenbaum v. Texas Building & Mortgage Co.Texas Supreme Court · 1943
- Guadalupe-Blanco River Authority v. City of San AntonioTexas Supreme Court · 1947
- Doty v. BarnardTexas Supreme Court · 1898
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by65 opinions
- Pitman v. Lightfoot, Texas Court of Appeals, 4th District (San Antonio)1996
- Hill v. Mobile Auto Trim, Inc.Texas Supreme Court · 1987
- Spellman v. American Universal Investment Co., Texas Court of Appeals, 13th District1984
- In Re Big 8 Food Stores, Ltd., Texas Court of Appeals, 8th District (El Paso)2005
- Sawyer v. PierceCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1979
60 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.