Legal Opinion

Mitchell v. City Nat. Bank of Wichita Falls

Court of Appeals of Texas

Decided January 12, 1929No. 12069PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

CONNEB, O. J.

As we understand the record in this ease, the material- question presented is a simple one. Briefly stated, ap-pellee instituted suit against M. D. May, E. W. Jones, and W. M. Mitchell on. a note, alleging that W. M. Mitchell and E. W. Jones was a partnership and that M. L. May, W. M. Mitchell, and;E. W. Jones constituted another partnership; that the partnership of Mitchell, Jones & May, by virtue of operations in the viSinity of Cross Plains, Tex., became in need of $15,000, for which the three partners were jointly and severally liable; that M. L. May applied to plaintiff for…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. George v. TateSupreme Court of the United States · 1881
  2. Harris County v. Donaldson & HinesCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1898
  3. Barton v. R. P. Ash Co.Court of Appeals of Texas · 1913
  4. Cannon v. WingMissouri Court of Appeals · 1910
  5. McLaughlin v. MulloyUtah Supreme Court · 1897

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Hacker v. Whitney Dam Lumber & Construction Co.Court of Appeals of Texas · 1949
  2. Misco-United Supply, Inc. v. The Petroleum CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1972
  3. Womack v. First National Bank of San AugustineCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1981

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

Powered by the Exa API