Legal Opinion

Charlie Thomas Courtesy Ford, Inc. v. Sid Murray Agency

Court of Appeals of Texas

Decided December 31, 1974No. 861PublishedCited by 16 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

YOUNG, Justice.

By this suit on account, the Sid Murray Agency, an insurance agency, sought to recover insurance premium payments and attorney’s fees from Charlie Thomas Courtesy Ford, Inc., an automobile dealer. The dealer interposed three primary defenses: accord and satisfaction, settlement, and statute of limitations. After a non-jury trial, the trial court in its judgment granted to the plaintiff recovery for unpaid premiums, but denied to it recovery for attorney’s fees. The defendant has appealed. From that part of the judgment about premiums, the appellant-dealer complains on…

2Cases cited20 opinions

  1. In Re King's EstateTexas Supreme Court · 1951
  2. Fambrough v. WagleyTexas Supreme Court · 1943
  3. Van Zandt v. Fort Worth PressTexas Supreme Court · 1962
  4. Jenkins v. Henry C. Beck CompanyTexas Supreme Court · 1969
  5. Meaders v. BiskampTexas Supreme Court · 1958

15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by16 opinions

  1. Rizk v. Financial Guardian Insurance Agency, Inc.Texas Supreme Court · 1979
  2. 1st Coppell Bank v. Smith, Texas Court of Appeals, 5th District (Dallas)1987
  3. Solis v. Evins, Texas Court of Appeals, 13th District1997
  4. Hycarbex, Inc. v. Anglo-Suisse, Inc., Texas Court of Appeals, 14th District (Houston)1996
  5. Blue Bell, Inc. v. IsbellCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1976

11 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