Hinzie v. W. L. Moody & Co.
Court of Appeals of Texas
1Opinion of the Court
GARRETT, Chief Justice.
— This was a proceeding by garnishment after judgment, begun by the appellees, W. L. Moody & Co., against Akin & Broyles, tenants of Martin Hinzie, the appellant, who intervened in the suit, to subject to their judgment the rents of a building in the city of Palestine claimed by Hinzie as his business homestead.
Prior to first day of January, 1888, the appellant was a married man, the head of a family, and owned and resided with his wife and children upon a lot in the city of Palestine as his homestead. His wife died on the date mentioned, and he has since continued to…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Wynne v. HudsonTexas Supreme Court · 1886
- Hargadene, McKittrick & Co. v. WhitfieldTexas Supreme Court · 1888
- Coates v. CaldwellTexas Supreme Court · 1888
- Silberberg v. TrillingTexas Supreme Court · 1891
- P. Pfeiffer & Co. v. McNatt & MarchTexas Supreme Court · 1888
3Cited by11 opinions
- Sargeant v. SargeantTexas Supreme Court · 1929
- Sargeant v. SargeantCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1928
- Hughes v. Team Bank (In Re Hughes)United States Bankruptcy Court, N.D. Texas · 1993
- In re CrumpUnited States Bankruptcy Court, N.D. Texas · 2015
- In re PresnallDistrict Court, W.D. Texas · 1909
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.