Automobile Underwriters' Co. v. Rhinehold
Court of Appeals of Texas
1Opinion of the CourtFly, C. J.
Appellant sued appellee to recover on four promissory notes executed by him, amounting in the aggregate to $180, and to foreclose a chattel mortgage on a Jordan automobile executed to the San Antonio Cadillac Company; the consideration for said notes and mortgage being the sale to ap-pellee of sa'id Jordan automobile. It was alleged that the notes and mortgage "had, for a valuable consideration, been transferred' and assigned to appellant. Tbe reasonable value of tbe automobile was alleged by appellant to be' $450. Appellee admitted bis liability for tbe $180, evidenced by tbe promissory…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Porter v. StateCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1887
- Williams v. StateCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1891
- Cunningham v. StateCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1889
3Cited by3 opinions
- Granger v. New Jersey InsuranceCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1930
- Bomar v. Insurors Indemnity & Ins. Co.Court of Appeals of Texas · 1950
- Bomar v. Insurors Indemnity & Ins. Co.Court of Appeals of Texas · 1950