Big Three Welding Equipment Co. v. Crutcher, Rolfs, Cummings, Inc.
Texas Supreme Court
1Opinion of the CourtJustice Smedley
*207The controversies herein are as to priorities of liens and consequently as to priorities of payment out of a fund deposited with the clerk of the district court by Humble Pipe Line Company as stakeholder. On trial without a jury the district court adjudged that the petitioner, Big Three Welding Equipment Company, Inc., which perfected a garnishment lien, is entitled to priority over all other parties to the suit; that the United States of America, having perfected a lien for taxes, is entitled to priority of payment over all other parties except Big Three Welding Equipment Company, Inc.; and…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Lippencott v. YorkTexas Supreme Court · 1893
- Hess v. Denman Lumber Co.Court of Appeals of Texas · 1920
- Arthur Morgan Trucking Co. v. ShartzerMissouri Court of Appeals · 1943
- Bon Marche Realty Co. v. Southern Surety Co.Washington Supreme Court · 1929
- Brace v. RashawSupreme Court of Vermont · 1946
3Cited by21 opinions
- Houston Pipe Line Company v. DwyerTexas Supreme Court · 1964
- Dean v. McFarlandWashington Supreme Court · 1972
- Stanford v. State Department of Highways & Public TransportationCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1982
- The Youngstown Sheet and Tube Company v. Lucey Products CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1968
- Orix Capital Markets, L.L.C. v. Washington Mutual Bank, Texas Court of Appeals, 5th District (Dallas)2008
16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.