Legal Opinion

Panhandle Motors Co. v. Foster

Court of Appeals of Texas

Decided November 22, 1922No. 2034PublishedCited by 9 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtBoxce, J.

The appellee has filed no brief, and we accept the statement of the case as made by appellant. Rule 40 (142 S. W. xiv) for Courts of Civil Appeals.

It appears that áppellant’s attorney failed to he present at the trial of the case, because of tbe fact that he was informed by the clerk of the court in which the case was pending that during the attorney’s absence the cause had been continued and the jury discharged for the term. The attorney was warranted in relying on information received from this source, and it justified his failure to be present when the case was called for trial on the next…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Fitzgerald v. WygalCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1900

3Cited by9 opinions

  1. Alexander v. HagedornTexas Supreme Court · 1950
  2. Texas Employers Ins. Ass'n v. Van PeltCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1935
  3. Borger v. Mineral Wells Clay Products Co.Court of Appeals of Texas · 1935
  4. Cragin v. Henderson County Oil Development Co.Court of Appeals of Texas · 1925
  5. Hall v. CarrollCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1933

4 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