Damants v. B. F. Dittmar Co.
Court of Appeals of Texas
1Opinion of the CourtSmith, J.
This writ of error was prosecuted from an order dismissing the suit, plaintiffs in error hkving declined to amend after the general demurrer to their third amended original petition had been sustained. The parties will be designated here as in the court below.
Plaintiffs’ trial petition covers twenty-two pages in the transcript, and the attached exhibits eight pages. It would be a bootless task to set out the allegations in order to test their sufficiency as against, the. general demurrer. We have reached the conclusion that the allegations, lengthy as they are, do not state a cause of action,…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Nocona Nat. Bank v. BoltonCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1912
- Puckett v. PattonCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1929
- Stanford v. United States Inv. Corp.Court of Appeals of Texas · 1925
3Cited by2 opinions
- Minneapolis-Moline Power Implement Co. v. GatzkiCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1933
- Lone Star Finance Corp. v. HackworthCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1934