Hackney Mfg. Co. v. Celum
Texas Commission of Appeals
Error to Court of Civil Appeals of Eighth Supreme Judicial District. Action by the Hackney Manufacturing Company against A. T. Celum and. others. A judgment for defendants was reformed and affirmed by the Court of Civil Appeals (189 S. W. 988), and plaintiff brings error.
1Opinion of the CourtSpencer, J.
Plaintiff in error, Hackney Manufacturing Company, a corporation, hereinafter referred to as plaintiff, brought this action against defendants in error, A. T. Ce-lum, R. W. Love, Albert T. Celum, and Valley Implement & Vehicle Company, hereinafter referred to as implement company, seeking to recover upon two promissory notes for the sum of $687.50 each, alleging in substance that defendants in error were jointly and severally liable — the defendants A. T. Celum, R. W. Love, and Albert T. Celum as principals, and the implement company by reason of its indorsement of the notes at their…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Pryor v. JollyTexas Supreme Court · 1897
- Aultman & Taylor Co. v. HefnerTexas Supreme Court · 1886
- R. K. Chatham & Co. v. JonesTexas Supreme Court · 1888
- Moyer v. BrandIndiana Supreme Court · 1885
- Restein v. McCadden & Bro.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1895
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- Dallas Farm MacHinery Company v. ReavesTexas Supreme Court · 1957
- Edward Thompson Co. v. SawyersTexas Supreme Court · 1921
- Texas & N. O. Ry. Co. v. ThompsonTexas Commission of Appeals · 1929
- Shary v. HelmickCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1935
- Dallas Farm MacHinery Company v. ReavesTexas Supreme Court · 1957
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.