Legal Opinion

McKean McNeal v. Martin

Court of Appeals of Texas

Decided April 6, 1922No. Nos. 2514, 2516. [fn*]PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

To entitle him to maintain his suit in Franklin county, the burden was on appellee to prove that the obligation he sought to enforce against appellants was evidenced by a contract in writing. Revised Statutes, art. 1903, as amended April 2, 1917; Vernon's St. art. 1830, subd. 5.

It will be noted that, while appellee alleged in his petition (the averments of which he made a part of his plea controverting the plea of privilege) that when he agreed to purchase the seed October 31, 1919, appellants' agent, Baker, represented that they were sound and proper for planting, and further alleged that it…

2Cases cited13 opinions

  1. Seley & Early v. WilliamsCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1899
  2. Gottlieb v. DismukesCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1921
  3. Robinson & Martin v. Houston & Texas Central RailroadTexas Supreme Court · 1912
  4. Callender, Holder & Co. v. ShortCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1904
  5. Southwestern Grain & Seed Co. v. BlumbergCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1913

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

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. A. B. Richards Medicine Co. v. AvantCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1925
  2. Martin v. McKeanTexas Commission of Appeals · 1924
  3. Maudr v. AnsleyCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1937
  4. De Witt v. Massachusetts Bonding & Ins. Co.Court of Appeals of Texas · 1926
  5. Maudr v. AnsleyCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1937

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

Powered by the Exa API