Legal Opinion

Smith v. Oak Cliff Bank & Trust Co.

Court of Appeals of Texas

Decided November 13, 1936No. 13458PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

DUNKLIN, Chief Justice.

The-decision Of the trial court, challenged here by appellant, to the effect that the constable’s fees of office were not subject to garnishment, is well supported on grounds of public policy so well expressed in National Bank of El Paso v. Fink, 86 Tex. 303, 24 S.W. 256, 40 Am.St.Rep. 833, and Sanger v. City of Waco, 15 Civ.App. 424, 40 S.W. 549 (writ of error refused). The further holding that the interests of others in the funds impounded, which the constable had no right to retain, and which would be lost to' them by application of the whole to the satisfaction of…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. National Bank v. FinkTexas Supreme Court · 1893
  2. Sanger Bros. v. City of WacoCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1897

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. RepublicBank Dallas v. National Bank of DaingerfieldCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1986
  2. Smith v. BradshawCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1937
  3. Bradshaw v. SmithTexas Supreme Court · 1937
  4. Smith v. BradshawCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1937

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

Powered by the Exa API