Scheuing v. Challiss
Court of Appeals of Texas
1Opinion of the Court
MURRAY, Justice.
It is suggested that we are in conflict with the case of Schroeder v. Rainboldt (Tex.Com.App.) 97 S.W. (2d) 679, an opinion published since our original opinion was delivered. We believe the cases are distinguishable. In that case the employee was not selling his own property, while in the case at bar J; H. Wigley was selling his own property. Wigley owned the ice; it was sold to him at the factory at 20 cents per hundred pounds. In the Schroeder Case the employee was not responsible for uncollected accounts, unless he extended credit to some one not authorized by the company,…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Schroeder v. RainboldtTexas Supreme Court · 1936
- Gulf Refining Co. v. ShirleyCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1936
- West Texas Produce Co. v. PateCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1933
3Cited by1 opinion
- Burris v. Hobart Mfg. Co.Ohio Court of Appeals · 1939