Legal Opinion
Simms v. O. L. Crigler Co.
Court of Appeals of Texas
Decided October 8, 1931No. 4057PublishedCited by 2 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtWillson, C. J.
(after stating the case as above).
Appellants insist that to authorize the judgment rendered by the court below it •must have appeared, and did not, that the city of Mt. Pleasant had power to issue the paving certificate sued upon, and must have appeared, further, and did not, if the city had such power, that it exercised it in the way provided by law.
We do not understand appellants to be in the attitude of denying the existence of power in the city, to enter into the contract with appellee and to issue the certificate, if the city had a right to invoke power conferred by the act 1927 (Gen.…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Smith v. PattersonTexas Supreme Court · 1922
- Heather v. City of PalmyraSupreme Court of Missouri · 1925
- In re GibbsSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1927
- Angelo v. City of Winston-SalemSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1927
- State Ex Rel. Schroeder v. MorrisIndiana Supreme Court · 1927
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- Copellar v. O. L. Crigler Co.Court of Appeals of Texas · 1935
- Guaranty Mortgage Co. v. HendricksCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1933