Legal Opinion

Central Surety & Insurance Corp. v. Hankins

Court of Appeals of Texas

Decided May 8, 1940No. 10660PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

NORVELL, Justice.

This action was brought by Hankins, appellee, against Central Surety and Insurance Corporation, appellant, as surety upon a bond executed in compliance with the Texas Agricultural Protective Act of 1937, Art. 1287 — 1, Vernon’s Tex.Ann.Civ.St., which is applicable only to the Texas Citrus Fruit Zone defined by Acts 1931, 42nd Leg., p. 838, Ch. 350, Art. 1700a — 2, Vernon’s Tex. Annotated Penal Code.

Palm Valley Canning Company, the principal upon the bond, was not made a party defendant, it being alleged that said company was insolvent, and had been adjudicated a bankrupt.

The…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Dunn v. HankinsCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1939
  2. J. M. Radford Grocery Co. v. MatthewsCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1935
  3. Rieger v. SmithCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1928
  4. Standard Paint Co. v. San Antonio Hardware Co.Court of Appeals of Texas · 1911

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Stovall v. WhatleyCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1944
  2. In re E.G.M.Court of Appeals of Texas · 1983
  3. Globe Indemnity Co. v. WhiteCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1960
  4. In Re EGM, Texas Court of Appeals, 4th District (San Antonio)1983

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

Powered by the Exa API