Legal Opinion

Hayden v. McMillan, Devine & Howard

Court of Appeals of Texas

Decided October 11, 1893No. 275PublishedCited by 11 opinions

Appeal from Bexar. Tried below before Hon. Geo. H. Noonan.

1Opinion of the Court

FLY, Associate Justice.

The parties to the above cause submit the following agreed statement of facts, under article 1414 of the Revised Statutes:

“1. That this is a garnishment proceeding, sued out in the case of G-. W. Hayden v. Rice Bros. & Co., pending in the District Court of the Thirty-seventh Judicial District of Bexar County, Texas. McMillan, Devine, & Howard are the garnishees, and filed an answer herein, admitting their indebtedness to Mrs. M. F. Rice and her husband, under lease contract entered into between them and Mrs. M. F. Rice, joined by her husband, leasing the premises known…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. De Blane v. Hugh Lynch & Co.Texas Supreme Court · 1859
  2. Rhine v. Blake & JenkinsTexas Supreme Court · 1883
  3. White v. Hugh Lynch & Co.Texas Supreme Court · 1862

3Cited by11 opinions

  1. Arnold v. LeonardTexas Supreme Court · 1925
  2. Robbins v. United StatesDistrict Court, N.D. California · 1925
  3. Armstrong v. TurbevilleCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1919
  4. Kaston v. PaxtonOregon Supreme Court · 1905
  5. O'Connor v. CommissionerUnited States Board of Tax Appeals · 1939

6 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