Legal Opinion

Heard v. Nichols

Texas Commission of Appeals

Decided April 27, 1927No. 722-4644PublishedCited by 11 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtPowell, P. J.

We quote tie findings of fact and conclusions of law of tie district court as follows:

“This case having been tried without a jury and decided for the plaintiff, and both the plaintiff and the defendant, C. F. Nichols and W. E. Hewit, having requested the court to make his conclusions of fact and law, and I now make and file them as follows:
“(1) I consider it unnecessary to state the nature of this suit, which is sufficiently shown by the pleadings, except as below

•“(2) The plaintiff, Mrs. Heard, is a widow. Her husband, the late W. J J. Heard, died in September, 1920, testate, and his will…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Houston Oil Co. of Texas v. KimballTexas Supreme Court · 1910
  2. Grubb v. McAfeeTexas Supreme Court · 1919
  3. Western Union Telegraph Co. v. HudsonTexas Supreme Court · 1910
  4. Ford & Damon v. FlewellenTexas Commission of Appeals · 1925
  5. W. T. Waggoner Estate v. Sigler Oil Co.Texas Commission of Appeals · 1926

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

3Cited by11 opinions

  1. Blackmon v. TrailTexas Commission of Appeals · 1929
  2. Woodson Oil Company v. PruettCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1955
  3. Morrison v. SwaimCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1949
  4. Minnie E. Haby, Joined Pro Forma by Her Husband, Homer H. Haby v. Stanolind Oil and Gas CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1956
  5. Gourmet, Inc. v. HurleyCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1977

6 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