Legal Opinion

Irwin v. State Nat. Bank of Ft. Worth

Court of Appeals of Texas

Decided March 20, 1920No. 9272Published

1Opinion

On Motion for Rehearing.

Appellee urgently but respectfully insists that on the original hearing we evidently did not read the authorities he cited, such as Owen v. Smith, 203 S. W. 1171; Railway Co. v. Tuggle, 196 S. W. 910; Beavers v. Order of Pilgrims, 204 S. W. 719; Kyle v. Blanchette, 158 S. W. 796. He is in error; we not only read all the authorities cited by both appellee and appellant, but many others. It is true that in the authorities cited by appellee, and in most of those cited by appellant, it affirmatively appeared that the request for findings of fact and conclusions of law were…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Wandry v. WilliamsTexas Supreme Court · 1910
  2. Kyle v. BlanchetteCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1913
  3. Ft. Worth & R. G. Ry. Co. v. TuggleCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1917
  4. Owen v. SmithCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1918
  5. Consumers' Lignite Co. v. JamesCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1918

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API