Legal Opinion

Nichols v. Murray

Court of Appeals of Texas

Decided April 22, 1926No. 1922PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtHiggins, J.

Murray sued Nichols to recover $295.05 alleged to be due for goods, wares, and merchandise sold and delivered as per verified open account attached to and made a pgrt of the petition. The plaintiff recovered judgment by default.

There is no statement of facts, but the judgment upon its face affirmatively shows that it was based solely upon and supported in evidence only by the account attached to the petition. The account does not disclose any item of the articles alleged to have been sold. The first item is typical of the rest. It reads: “June 21, 1923, 241 50.52.” This account is…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Watson Co., Builders v. BleekerCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1924
  2. Wall & Carr v. J. M. Radford Grocery Co.Court of Appeals of Texas · 1915
  3. Tankersley v. Martin-Reo Sales Co.Court of Appeals of Texas · 1922
  4. A. Harris & Co. v. Grinnell Willis & Co.Court of Appeals of Texas · 1916

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Mega v. Anglo Iron & Metal Co. of HarlingenCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1980
  2. Williamsburg Nursing Home, Inc. v. Paramedics, Inc.Court of Appeals of Texas · 1970
  3. Alexander v. Texoma Wholesale JewelersCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1957
  4. Willacy County v. Central Power & Light Co.Court of Appeals of Texas · 1934
  5. Coon v. Pettijohn & Pettijohn Plumbing, Inc.Court of Appeals of Texas · 1979

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API