Legal Opinion

Pierson v. Pierson

Court of Appeals of Texas

Decided April 17, 1939No. 5011Published

1Opinion

On Motion for Rehearing and to Certify.

Appellee has filed a motion for rehearing in which he vigorously contends we erred in our holding to the effect that William H. Pierson, individually and as administrator, Walter C. Pierson, guardian, Howard Pier-son, and Alice Thomas and her husband, Harvey Thomas, were not necessary parties to the suit as contemplated by Sub. 29a of Art. 1995, R.C.-S.-, Vernon’s Ann.Civ. St. art. 1995, subd.' 29a. He alleges that we are in conflict with the recent cases of Pioneer Bldg. & Loan Ass’n v. Gray, 125 S.W.2d 284, by the Commission of Appeals, and Hamilton et…

2Cases cited13 opinions

  1. Pioneer Building & Loan Ass'n v. GrayTexas Supreme Court · 1939
  2. First Natl. Bank in Dallas v. PierceTexas Supreme Court · 1934
  3. Bradford v. KnowlesTexas Supreme Court · 1894
  4. Johnson v. First Nat. Bank of BrenhamCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1931
  5. Smith v. Dozier Const. Co.Court of Appeals of Texas · 1933

8 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