Legal Opinion
Bell v. Humble Oil & Refining Co.
Texas Supreme Court
Decided May 10, 1944No. A-48PublishedCited by 19 opinions
1Opinion of the Court 1
ON MOTION FOR REHEARING.
2Opinion of the Court · AlexanderChief Justice Alexander
We have heretofore refused for want of merit an application for a writ of error in the above cause. Motion for rehearing on such application is now before us.
The evidence in this case conclusively shows that the plaintiff was an employee of the defendant, Humble Oil & Refining Company, and that he was working in the course of his employ ment as such employee at the time he was injured. The plaintiff was an employee of Hancock, the independent contractor, during the daytime, or for a part of the day, but was employed by the Humble Oil & Refining Company to work as a…
3Cited by19 opinions
- Exxon Corp. v. PerezTexas Supreme Court · 1992
- Shell Chemical Company v. LambTexas Supreme Court · 1973
- J. A. Robinson Sons, Inc. v. EllisCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1967
- Gulf Oil Corporation v. Mrs. Eva Wright and the Standard Insurance Company, IntervenerCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1956
- Gray v. Baker & Taylor Drilling Co.Court of Appeals of Texas · 1980
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.