Legal Opinion
Casey v. Gibson Products Co.
Court of Appeals of Texas
Decided November 19, 1948No. 13946PublishedCited by 5 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
YOUNG, Justice.
Gibson Products Company, Inc., has here ■sued Messrs. Casey and Smith on a written instrument designated as a “continuing guaranty”; and following the trial, judgment was rendered for plaintiff notwithstanding -the jury verdict for $350 plus $75 attorney’s fees and costs; both defendants bringing up such adverse ruling for review.
Appejllee was engaged in the sale of wholesale drugs and drug sundries, headquarters in Dallas with branch stores over the State including Lubbock. Its method of business was to sell on consignment, each consignee having particular territory and who,…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Irvine v. GradyTexas Supreme Court · 1892
- Straus-Frank Co. v. HughesTexas Commission of Appeals · 1941
- Straus-Frank Co. v. HughesTexas Supreme Court · 1941
- Bergman Produce Co. v. BrownCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1914
- Adams v. Lasalle Life Ins. Co.Court of Appeals of Texas · 1936
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- Brenton Bank & Trust Co., Clarion v. BeisnerSupreme Court of Iowa · 1978
- Board of Trustees v. National Indemnity Co.Court of Appeals of Texas · 1972
- Brandtjen & Kluge, Inc. v. HughesCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1951
- Starcraft Company, a Division of Bangor Punta Operations, Inc., and Third Party v. C.J. Heck Company of Texas, Inc., Robert A. Johnson and Carol H. Johnson v. Temple National Bank, Third PartyCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1984
- Starcraft Co. v. C.J. Heck Co. of Texas, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1984