Legal Opinion
Smith v. Folmar.
Court of Appeals of Texas
Decided June 16, 1920No. 6229. [fn*]PublishedCited by 6 opinions
Appeal from District Court, Milam County; John Watson, Judge. Action by J. T. Folmar against R. E. Smith. Judgment for plaintiff, and defendant appeals.
1Opinion of the CourtBrady, J.
Appellee, J. T. Folmar, sued appellant, R. E. Smith, to recover commissions for effecting a land sale. The case was tried without a jury, and judgment was rendered for the plaintiff. The issues on the trial are sufficiently indicated by the findings of the trial court, which are as follows:
“Findings of Fact.
“I-find that for some years prior to the year 1919 the defendant, R. E. Smith, owned a tract of 825 acres of land in Milam county, Texas, and that some time about November or December, 1918, he and the plaintiff entered into an agreement, by the terms of which the said defendant agreed to…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Houston Oil Co. of Texas v. KimballTexas Supreme Court · 1910
- Texas & New Orleans Railroad v. ScarboroughTexas Supreme Court · 1908
- Glover v. PfeufferCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1914
- House v. FilgoCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1914
- Delano v. Delano.Court of Appeals of Texas · 1916
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- Temple Lumber Co. v. PulliamCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1925
- Weeks v. LippCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1932
- Cisco & N. E. Ry. Co. v. ProctorCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1924
- Cisco & N. E. Ry. Co. v. ProctorCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1924
- Hardy v. Bumpstead.Court of Appeals of Texas · 1929
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.