Legal Opinion

Park v. Prendergast, Smith & Co.

Court of Appeals of Texas

Decided October 6, 1893No. 206PublishedCited by 3 opinions

Error from Limestone.

1Opinion of the Court

FINLEY, Associate Justice.

Conclusions of Fact.—The conclusions, of fact of the trial judge are approved and adopted by this court.

Conclusions of Law.—The first assignment of error presented in brief of plaintiffs in error is as follows: “ The court erred in giving judgment for Prendergast, Smith & Co. against the said Ada B. McCain, executrix,, etc., and in holding their lien superior to plaintiffs’, because there was no-such pleadings filed by said Prendergast, Smith & Co., setting up a new promise in writing, as would authorize the judgment in their favor against said executrix.”

Plaintiffs’…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Freeman v. . AuldNew York Court of Appeals · 1870
  2. Hancock v. FlemingIndiana Supreme Court · 1885
  3. Howard v. JohnsonTexas Supreme Court · 1888
  4. De Witt v. Miller's Adm'rTexas Supreme Court · 1852
  5. Gulf v. Montier.Texas Supreme Court · 1884

4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Michigan Savings & Loan Ass'n v. AtteberyCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1897
  2. General Electric Co. v. Canton City Ice & Light Co.Court of Appeals of Texas · 1911
  3. Palfrey v. HarborthCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1942

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

Powered by the Exa API