Legal Opinion
Hume v. Schintz
Court of Appeals of Texas
Decided June 2, 1897PublishedCited by 7 opinions
Appeal from Travis. Tried below before Hon. F. C. Morris. For the history of this litigation, see Schintz v. Morris, 89 Texas, 648; Hume v. Schintz, 90 Texas, 72; Schintz v. Morris, 13 Texas Civ. App., 580; same case, 35 S. W. Rep., 516; 35 S. W. Rep., 825 (on rehearing); 36 S. W. Rep., 292 (dissenting opinion); Hume v. Schintz, 91 Texas, 204.
1Opinion of the Court
GOLLARD,
Associate Justice.—-The statement of the case made iri appellants’ brief is admitted by appellee to be sufficient for the purposes of the appeal, and it is adopted by this court. It is as follows:
“The appellee brought suit against appellants on divers alleged causes of action, two of which were false imprisonment, and malicious prosecution for a felony. The two mentioned are all it is needful to notice, as demurrers were sustained to the others and they cut no figure in the subsequent proceedings, and are not here for review. The errors committed during the trial, if any, are not…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- J. M. Hamilton & Co. v. PrescottTexas Supreme Court · 1889
- Linn v. ArambouldTexas Supreme Court · 1881
- Gulf, Colorado & Santa Fe Ry. Co. v. JamesTexas Supreme Court · 1889
- Wootters v. KauffmanTexas Supreme Court · 1887
- Boone v. HulseyTexas Supreme Court · 1888
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- Danner v. Walker-Smith Co.Court of Appeals of Texas · 1912
- Rone v. MartiCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1922
- Texas & P. Ry. Co. v. SheftallCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1904
- Warren v. KimmellCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1911
- Bracewell v. BeenCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1928
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.