Legal Opinion

Murray v. Brazzel

Court of Appeals of Texas

Decided February 6, 1969No. 4706PublishedCited by 11 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

WILSON, Justice.

Plaintiff-appellee Brazzel recovered judgment against Sid Murray, his wife and the Sid Murray Agency for over $200,000 actual and exemplary damages in a jury trial. The subject matter of the suit is Brazzel’s claim for agent’s renewal commissions, which he contends he is entitled to from his sale of insurance while a salesman for the Murray Agency, after termination of his employment.

Brazzel’s petition alleged three counts: (1) the breach of his 1948 written agency contract with the Murray Agency; (2) an action, as he says, “based upon promissory fraud or deceit arising…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Ditto v. Ditto Investment CompanyTexas Supreme Court · 1958
  2. Matthews v. General Accident Fire & Life Assurance Corp.Texas Supreme Court · 1961
  3. Waldo v. Galveston H. & S. A. Ry. Co.Texas Commission of Appeals · 1932
  4. Pacific Coast Engineering Co. v. Trinity Construction Co.Court of Appeals of Texas · 1967
  5. Sears, Roebuck & Co. v. CokerCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1968

3Cited by11 opinions

  1. Brazzel v. MurrayTexas Supreme Court · 1972
  2. Dennis Weaver Chevrolet, Inc. v. ChadwickCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1978
  3. City of Willow Park v. BryantCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1988
  4. Sudderth v. HowardCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1977
  5. Freitas v. Twin City Fisherman's Cooperative Ass'nCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1970

6 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