Legal Opinion
Gibson v. Texas Pac. Coal Co.
Texas Commission of Appeals
Decided November 26, 1924No. 580-4047PublishedCited by 9 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtChapman, J.
J. R. Stubblefield and A. J. Gibson entered into the following self-explanatory contract, which was duly acknowledged by both of them:
*138“The State of Texas, County of Eastland.
“Know all men by these presents that J. R. Stubblefield and A. J. Gibson, both' of Eastland county, Tex., have made the following agreement:
“Eirst. The said Gibson has this day employed the said Stubblefield to represent him in the prosecution of a claim against the Texas & Pacific Ooal Company, which said claim grows out of an injury received by said Gibson, while in the employment of the said Texas & Pacific Coal…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Galveston, Harrisburg & San Antonio Railway Co. v. GintherTexas Supreme Court · 1903
- Seiter v. SmithTexas Supreme Court · 1912
- Texas & Pacific Railway Co. v. VaughanCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1897
- Receivers v. GreenCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1894
- Trinity County Lumber Co. v. HoltCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1912
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by9 opinions
- Dow Chemical Company v. BentonTexas Supreme Court · 1962
- Carroll v. HuntTexas Supreme Court · 1943
- Wheeler v. FronhoffCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1925
- Butler v. YoungWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1939
- Trinity River Authority of Texas v. BaddersCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1970
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.