Legal Opinion

Kelso v. Hanson

Texas Supreme Court

Decided March 10, 1965No. A-10311PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

STEAKLEY, Justice.

This case presents for decision the question of the liability of sureties on a replevy bond executed pursuant to Rule 708.1 Delbert D. Flock employed Wayne Kelso, Petitioner, to repair a machine for him. After completion of the repairs the machine was returned to Flock’s possession. Kelso was not paid and thereafter regained possession of the machine. Flock sued Kelso and sequestered the machine pursuant to Rule 696 et seq. Flock alleged in his suit that Kelso wrongfully regained and was withholding possession of the machine; that it earned an average of $100.00 per day;…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. American Mortgage Corp. v. SamuellTexas Supreme Court · 1937
  2. Finegan v. ReadCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1894
  3. Flock v. KelsoCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1963
  4. Kelso v. HansonCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1964

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Barfield v. BrogdonCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1978
  2. Rexford v. HollidayCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1991
  3. Barfield v. BrogdonCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1978

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

Powered by the Exa API