Legal Opinion

McCormack v. Cockburn

Court of Appeals of Texas

Decided February 15, 1939No. 3359PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Per curiam

The majority of the court is now of the opinion that parol evidence was not admissible to establish ■ the facts on which appellee Cockburn was released from his liability on the notes in issue. McCormick & Ray in their Texas Law of Evidence, Sec. 725, say: “The Parol Evidence Rule is the rule which, upon the establishment of the existence of a writing intended as a completed memorial of a legal transaction, denies efficacy to any prior or contemporary expressions of the parties relating to the same subject-matter as that to which the written memorial relates.” The deed from appellants to…

2Cases cited17 opinions

  1. Heffron v. PollardTexas Supreme Court · 1889
  2. Dolson v. De GanahlTexas Supreme Court · 1888
  3. Sanger v. WarrenTexas Supreme Court · 1898
  4. Texas Land & Cattle Co. v. Carroll & IlerTexas Supreme Court · 1885
  5. Cooper v. CooperCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1934

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

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Wagner v. Morris, Texas Court of Appeals, 1st District (Houston)1983
  2. Wagner v. Morris, Texas Court of Appeals, 1st District (Houston)1983

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

Powered by the Exa API