Alexander Marketing Co. v. Medford
Court of Appeals of Texas
1Opinion of the Court
HALL, Justice.
The following is the agreed statement of the case: “The appellant was sued by the appellee on a stated account alleging the liability therefor against appellant because of goods, wares and merchandise furnished one E. Cannon, as the agent of appellant; and, in the alternative sought to allege agency in the said E. Cannon by estoppel. The estoppel allegations were based on the similarity of operations by E. Cannon during the period the account accrued, to previous years operations by E. Cannon while he was the agent of the appellant. The appellant denied E. Cannon to be its agent…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- Wininger v. Ft. Worth & Denver City Railway Co.Texas Supreme Court · 1912
- Bradstreet Co. v. GillTexas Supreme Court · 1888
- Underwood v. Security Life and Annuity Co.Texas Supreme Court · 1917
- Thraves v. HooserTexas Commission of Appeals · 1932
- Daugherty v. WilesTexas Commission of Appeals · 1919
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- Boston Ins. Co. v. RainwaterCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1946
- Nelson v. JordanCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1983
- McLean v. McCollumCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1948
- Kolacny v. PelechCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1947
- First Nat. Bank in Dalhart v. FlackCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1949
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.