Legal Opinion

Hart v. Wilson

Court of Appeals of Texas

Decided January 13, 1926No. 2581. [fn*]Published

1Opinion

On Motion for Rehearing.

It is contended by appellant that we erred in holding that Brokaw was not a necessary party to this action. We think the authorities cited in the original opinion, and the general rule whch obtains in the enforcement of equitable remedies that only persons who are interested in the controversy are necessary parties, are sufficient to sustain our holding. Since the original opinion was written, the Third Edition of Pomeroy’s Specific Performance of Contracts has reached the library. In discussing the rule as enforced by the English courts, which it is said does not…

2Cases cited16 opinions

  1. Grand Fraternity v. MeltonTexas Supreme Court · 1909
  2. Kalteyer v. MitchellTexas Supreme Court · 1909
  3. Van Dyke v. ColeSupreme Court of Vermont · 1908
  4. Allison v. ShillingTexas Supreme Court · 1864
  5. Fowler v. FowlerIllinois Supreme Court · 1903

11 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