Legal Opinion

Alexander Film Co. v. Boxwell

Court of Appeals of Texas

Decided January 11, 1933No. 3945PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtMartin, J.

Appellant is a Delaware corporation without a permit to transact business in Texas as required by article 1529, R. S. Suit was brought for a balance alleged to be due under the contract mentioned below. Its right to maintain this suit by virtue of the terms of article 1536, R. S., was properly raised by plea in abatement. The plea was sustained upon a hearing by the trial court and the suit dismissed. Appellant claims here that the transaction forming the basis of this suit was “interstate,” which required no such permit. The question is purely one of fact.

The evidence introduced was…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Browning v. City of WaycrossSupreme Court of the United States · 1914
  2. Buhler v. E. T. Burrowes Co.Court of Appeals of Texas · 1914
  3. Elliott Electric Co. v. ClevengerCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1927
  4. Motor Supply Co. v. General Outdoor Advertising Co.Court of Appeals of Texas · 1931

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Kutka v. Temporaries, Inc.District Court, S.D. Texas · 1983
  2. Kimball-Krough Pump Co. v. JuddCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1935
  3. Fate-Root-Heath Co. v. Howard Kenyon Dredging Co.Court of Appeals of Texas · 1938

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

Powered by the Exa API