Legal Opinion
Bluntzer v. Dewees & Hinkle
Texas Supreme Court
Decided January 16, 1891No. 2742PublishedCited by 12 opinions
Appeal from Nueces. Tried below before Hon. J. C. Russell.
1Opinion of the Court
HENRY, Associate Justice.
This suit was brought by the appellees to recover damages for a breach of the following contract, charged to have been executed by the defendants: ■
“ San .Antonio, Texas, 2—22—1884.
“ I agree to sell Dewees and Hinkle 3000 head of yearling heifers and 3100 [alteration] head of 3-year-old heifers, at my ranch in San Patricio County, at $13 for l’s aud $16 for 3’s,- if they pay me one-third of the money by the 15th of March and balance on delivery of cattle; and I agree to deliver either or both herds at Cotulla or Pearsall at 35 cents per head when they are passed on at…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- McBride v. BangussTexas Supreme Court · 1885
- Baines v. Ullmann, Lewis & Co.Texas Supreme Court · 1888
- Schmick v. NoelTexas Supreme Court · 1888
- Wylie v. PoseyTexas Supreme Court · 1888
3Cited by12 opinions
- Ellis County State Bank v. KeeverTexas Supreme Court · 1994
- Gulf Pipe Line Co. v. NearenTexas Commission of Appeals · 1940
- Gulf Pipe Line Co. v. NearenTexas Supreme Court · 1940
- American Freehold Land Mortgage Co. of London v. PaceCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1900
- Mathews v. CaldwellTexas Commission of Appeals · 1924
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.