Legal Opinion
J. A. Flomerfelt & Co. v. Hume Bros.
Court of Appeals of Texas
Decided June 12, 1895No. 1281PublishedCited by 16 opinions
Appeal from County Court of Travis County. Tried below before Hon. William Yon Rosenberg, Jr., County Judge. The opinion contains a statement.
1Opinion of the Court
COLLARD, Associate Justice.
We havejcarefully examined the testimony, and conclude that plaintiffs below (the appellants) failed to make proof of the alleged fact that Hume Bros, contracted to pay the claim of plaintiffs against Holley & Hume. The following letter is the original proposition made by Hume Bros, to plaintiffs:
“Austin, Texas, 1-7-91.
“J. A. Flomerfelt & Co.,
“Ho. 177 Broadway, New York City.
“Gents: — We write you to state that we have purchased from Holley .& Hume their entire stock of gents’ furnishing goods and book accounts due them; we were compelled to make this purchase on…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Minneapolis & St. Louis Railway v. Columbus Rolling MillSupreme Court of the United States · 1886
- National Bank v. HallSupreme Court of the United States · 1880
- Baker v. Johnson CountySupreme Court of Iowa · 1873
- Falls Wire Manufacturing Co. v. BroderickMissouri Court of Appeals · 1883
- Johnson v. JonesIndiana Supreme Court · 1881
3Cited by16 opinions
- Ramsay v. WilhelmCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1932
- Pease v. State Ex Rel. SutherlandCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1913
- Southland Life Ins. Co. v. GatewoodCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1938
- Cranfill v. Swann Petroleum Co.Court of Appeals of Texas · 1923
- Great West Grain & Seed Co. v. RayCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1947
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.