Legal Opinion

McSpadden v. Eads

Court of Appeals of Texas

Decided February 7, 1914PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtHall, J.

In the justice court of Col-lingsworth county the apppellants recovered a judgment against the appellee for $100, with interest. The cause of action, as shown by the record from the county court, is as follows: “Suit upon contract for $100.00 of date October 25, 1912, due October 25, 1912, and interest six per cent, from date. The nature of plaintiffs’ demand being in substance as follows: Suit for commission of $100.00, for procuring a buyer for the land of W. M. Eads, which W. M. Eads promised and agreed to pay to plaintiffs for said services, and plaintiffs have rendered the services as…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. S. S. White Dental Manufacturing Co. v. HertzbergTexas Supreme Court · 1899
  2. Amarillo Commercial Co. v. Chicago, R. I. & G. Ry. Co.Court of Appeals of Texas · 1911
  3. Mayes v. MagillCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1908
  4. Harrold v. BarwiseCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1895
  5. Thompson v. BairdCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1912

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Hufstutler v. Western Union Telegraph Co.Court of Appeals of Texas · 1914
  2. Houston & T. C. Ry. Co. v. ClaybrookCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1925
  3. Hands of Healing Residential Treatment Center, Inc. v. John Havenar, Texas Court of Appeals, 1st District (Houston)2015

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

Powered by the Exa API