Legal Opinion

Davis v. Wildenthal

Court of Appeals of Texas

Decided March 7, 1951No. 4810Published

1Opinion

On Appellee’s Motion For Rehearing.

PRICE, Chief Justice.

In his motion for a re-hearing ap-pellee insists that we were in error in holding that La Salle County was a necessary and indispensable party to this suit. He cites and relies heavily on Terrell v. Middleton, Tex.Civ.App., 187 S.W. 367, 369, Wr.ref. 108 Tex. 14, 191 S.W. 1138, with concurring opinion by Mr. Justice Hawkins. This authority unquestionably enunciates the rule that “when a state officer acts without legal authority, he is not acting for or in the interest of the state, and a suit against him is not a suit against the state.…

Also in this document: Concurrence.

2Cases cited12 opinions

  1. Cobb v. HarringtonTexas Supreme Court · 1945
  2. Osborne v. KeithTexas Supreme Court · 1944
  3. Carroll v. Williams, County TreasurerTexas Supreme Court · 1918
  4. Terrell v. MiddletonCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1916
  5. Hoffman v. DavisTexas Supreme Court · 1937

7 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