Washington v. Rosario Mining & Milling Co.
Court of Appeals of Texas
Appeal from Tarrant. Tried below before Hon. Irby Dunklin.
1Opinion of the Court
CONNER, Chief Justice.
In this case we are confronted with a transcript of 1041 pages, and with briefs presenting some seventy-three assignments of error. This statement merely will render obvious the futility of any effort to dispose of all questions presented in detail. We must perforce content ourselves with a determination in a general way of snch questions, and such questions only, as in our judgment are material in view of the conclusions reached by ns. Thus treated, the difficulty in disposition is largely one of labor.
Briefly stated, the suit was instituted by appellants; William D. H.…
2Cases cited18 opinions
- Minneapolis & St. Louis Railway v. Columbus Rolling MillSupreme Court of the United States · 1886
- Smith v. WhittierCalifornia Supreme Court · 1892
- Higgins v. . EagletonNew York Court of Appeals · 1898
- National Bank v. HallSupreme Court of the United States · 1880
- Weaver v. BurrWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1888
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by12 opinions
- Masterson v. Amarillo Oil Co.Court of Appeals of Texas · 1923
- Lacquement v. HandyCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1994
- Cuero Cotton Oil & Mfg. Co. v. Feeders' Supply Co.Court of Appeals of Texas · 1918
- Antwine v. ReedTexas Supreme Court · 1947
- Owens v. Corsicana Petroleum Co.Court of Appeals of Texas · 1914
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.