Legal Opinion

Holliday v. Anderson

Court of Appeals of Texas

Decided April 18, 1968No. 4694PublishedCited by 8 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

WILSON, Justice.

This is an action on a promissory note by the payees against the maker. We affirm summary judgment for plaintiffs.

The maker of the note pleaded and presented his affidavit reciting that the date of payment of the note was originally left blank, but plaintiffs filled the blank without authority from him and without his knowledge and consent, by inserting the words, “on demand”; and that the actual oral agreement was that he was to pay the note when he “was able to do so”. He now insists that the summary judgment was not authorized because there is a fact issue as to the…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Kuper v. SchmidtTexas Supreme Court · 1960
  2. Fisher v. HowardCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1965
  3. Republic National Bank of Dallas v. StrealyTexas Supreme Court · 1961
  4. Schwarz v. Straus-Frank CompanyCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1964
  5. Stephens v. UnderwoodCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1941

3Cited by8 opinions

  1. Leinen v. Buffington's Bayou City Service Co.Court of Appeals of Texas · 1992
  2. Texas Export Development Corporation v. SchlederCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1974
  3. Gill v. State, Texas Court of Appeals, 13th District1984
  4. Antrim v. McMurreyCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1977
  5. Wyatt v. NATIONAL CHEMSEARCH CORPORATIONCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1969

3 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