Legal Opinion

Dunbar v. Fuller

Court of Appeals of Texas

Decided November 26, 1952No. 10091PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

ARCHER, Chief Justice.

Plaintiff filed this suit against defendant alleging that defendant had breached an alleged contract duty to convey an overriding royalty interest to plaintiff and praying for specific performance. Defendant denied such breach. Impossibility of performance was alleged as an additional defense. Plaintiff filed a Motion for Summary Judgment under Rule 166-A Texas Rules of Civil Procedure. Defendant filed a contest to said motion and also his own Motion for Summary Judgment. Thus each party contended that he was entitled to judgment as a matter of law, there being no…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Cowden v. Broderick & Calvert, Inc.Texas Supreme Court · 1938
  2. Cotherman v. Oriental Oil Co.Court of Appeals of Texas · 1925
  3. Midas Oil Co. v. Stanolind Oil & Gas Co.Texas Supreme Court · 1944
  4. Magnolia Petroleum Co. v. StormCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1950
  5. Levy Plumbing Co. v. Standard Sanitary Mfg. Co.Court of Appeals of Texas · 1933

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

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Railroad Commission of Texas v. Aluminum Co. of AmericaTexas Supreme Court · 1964
  2. Minnie E. Haby, Joined Pro Forma by Her Husband, Homer H. Haby v. Stanolind Oil and Gas CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1956
  3. Pan American Petroleum Corp. v. Railroad Commission of TexasCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1960
  4. Estate of Grimes v. Dorchester Gas Producing Co., Texas Court of Appeals, 7th District (Amarillo)1986
  5. Estate of Grimes v. Dorchester Gas Producing Co., Texas Court of Appeals, 7th District (Amarillo)1986

1 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