Scoggins v. Furst Thomas

WILLSON, O. J.

(after stating the facts as above). That the contract between appellees and appellant Scoggins covering the sale and purchase of the merchandise was in violation of the statute (articles 7796 to 7809, Vernon’s Statutes 1914) against trusts, monopolies, and conspiracies in restraint of trade, and therefore void (article 7807, Vernon’s Statutes; W. T. Raleigh Co. v. Land [Tex. Civ. App.] 261 S. W. 186; W. T. Raleigh Co. v. Land [Tex. Com. App.] 279 S. W. 810), is not questioned here. The contention that appellees nevertheless were entitled to recover as determined by the judgment…