Legal Opinion
Smith v. Sealy State Bank of Sealy
Court of Appeals of Texas
Decided May 4, 1933No. 9842PublishedCited by 3 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
GRAVES, Justice.
This appeal by the plaintiff below is from a judgment of the trial court wherein respective general demurrers and motions of the opposing parties challenging the sufficiency of the proceedings were sustained and • the writ of garnishment quashed, the judgment in full being as follows:
*487“E. E. Smith vs. Sealy State Bank of Sealy, Texas, Garnishee.
“No. 6394
“In the District -Court of Austin County, Texas, January Term, A. D. 1932.
“29th day of January, A. D. 1932.
“On this day came on to be heard the above-entitled- and numbered cause, wherein E. E. Smith is plaintiff in garnishment…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- Teague v. FairchildTexas Commission of Appeals · 1929
- Carter Bros. & Co. v. BushTexas Supreme Court · 1890
- Gillespie v. LovellSupreme Court of Kansas · 1871
- W. C. Howard & Co. v. ParksCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1892
- Shedd v. McConnellSupreme Court of Kansas · 1877
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- Betzen v. Exxon Corp., Texas Court of Appeals, 8th District (El Paso)1985
- Camden Fire Ins. Ass'n v. First Nat. Bank of WaurikaCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1935
- Big Spring Tractor Co. v. ScottCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1952