Legal Opinion

Poenisch v. Quarnstrom

Court of Appeals of Texas

Decided January 6, 1965No. 14332PublishedCited by 8 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

BARROW, Justice.

This is the second appeal of this case. Appellants brought this action in trespass to try title and for partition of Lots 11 and 12 in Block “T” of the City of Brownsville. On the prior appeal the judgments of the District Court and the Court of Civil Appeals upholding the limitation claim of ap-pellee, Mamie Quarnstrom, were reversed and the cause remanded with instructions. 361 S.W.2d 367, 372 (Tex.1962). 1

On remand, appellee asserted a claim for taxes and redemption money paid by her, together with interest on said payments, and for improvements made to said property during…

2Cases cited16 opinions

  1. Vermillion v. HaynesTexas Supreme Court · 1948
  2. Sayers v. PylandTexas Supreme Court · 1942
  3. Cleveland v. MilnerTexas Commission of Appeals · 1943
  4. Cleveland v. MilnerTexas Supreme Court · 1943
  5. Poenisch v. QuarnstromTexas Supreme Court · 1962

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

3Cited by8 opinions

  1. Gonzalez v. GonzalezCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1977
  2. Bouquet v. BelkCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1966
  3. Mapco, Inc. v. CarterCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1989
  4. Boyles v. Hyder (In re Boyles)United States Bankruptcy Court, N.D. Texas · 1982
  5. Emma Casso, Elvia Laurel and Ramiro R. Casso, M.D. v. David Lee Fullerton, Texas Court of Appeals, 4th District (San Antonio)2006

3 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