Legal Opinion

Staats v. Miller

Texas Supreme Court

Decided November 14, 1951No. A-3256PublishedCited by 128 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtJustice Brewster

This is a suit for damages for the alleged conversion of a cotton harvester filed by petitioners, O. T. Staats and F. M. Woolbright, against respondent, H. E. Miller. At the conclusion of petitioners’ testimony the trial court granted respondent’s motion for an instructed verdict and entered judgment accordingly. The Court of Civil Appeals affirmed. 240 S. W. 2d 342.

Respondent moved for the instructed verdict on the ground that petitioners had pleaded a “single act of alleged conversion” and had not alleged any other cause of action, except for conversion, “while the evidence introduced by…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. United States v. Jefferson Electric Manufacturing Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1934
  2. Wiseman v. BaylorTexas Supreme Court · 1887
  3. Staats v. MillerCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1951

3Cited by128 opinions

  1. Southwestern Elec. Power Co. v. Burlington Northern Railroad Co.Texas Supreme Court · 1998
  2. Everett v. TK-Taito, L.L.C.Court of Appeals of Texas · 2005
  3. Amoco Production Co. v. Smith, Texas Court of Appeals, 8th District (El Paso)1997
  4. In re Porsche Cars North America, Inc.District Court, S.D. Ohio · 2012
  5. Edwards v. Mid-Continent Office Distributors, L.P., Texas Court of Appeals, 5th District (Dallas)2008

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

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

Powered by the Exa API