Legal Opinion
Robertson v. Trammell
Texas Supreme Court
Decided December 22, 1904No. Application No. 4461PublishedCited by 24 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
The instruments executed to the railroad company by Trammell and his sureties do not constitute a release, but the contract is a covenant not to sue the Houston Texas Central Railroad Company on account of the injuries received, and such contract did not have the effect to discharge Robertson from liability to Trammell. Chicago v. Babcock, 143 Ill. 358, and see 58 L.R.A., 299, where the authorities are collected. Giving an indemnity bond to the railroad company did not change the character of the transaction.
For the reasons stated the application for a writ of error is refused.
2Cases cited1 opinion
- City of Chicago v. BabcockIllinois Supreme Court · 1892
3Cited by24 opinions
- Palestine Contractors, Inc. v. PerkinsTexas Supreme Court · 1964
- Cypress Creek Utility Service Co. v. MullerTexas Supreme Court · 1982
- Matheson v. O'KaneMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1912
- Edens v. FletcherSupreme Court of Kansas · 1908
- Robertson v. TrammellCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1904
19 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.