Legal Opinion

Longhart Supply Co. v. Zweifel

Court of Appeals of Texas

Decided May 14, 1931No. 2542PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtHiggins, J.

Appellant brought this suit against the ap-pellee to recover a balance of $1,126.46, due upon verified open-account for goods, wares, and merchandise sold and delivered to the defendant.

■ Appellee answered by general demurrer, general denial and special plea, setting up that on April 18, 1927, the estate of Hofmeier Healy Drilling Company, a partnership, was assigned to defendant in trust for the benefit of the creditors of said company, which assignment was made at the request and behest of said creditors; that the debt sued for was contracted by the trustee in his capacity as such, and the…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Taylor v. Davis' AdministratrixSupreme Court of the United States · 1884
  2. Connally v. W. H. Lyons & Co.Texas Supreme Court · 1891
  3. Bank of Washington v. San Benito & R. G. v. Ry. Co.Court of Appeals of Texas · 1927
  4. J. P. Webster & Sons v. Utopia ConfectioneryCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1923
  5. Andrus v. PettusTexas Supreme Court · 1872

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Keystone Pipe & Supply Co. v. ZweifelTexas Supreme Court · 1936
  2. Nacol v. McNuttCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1990
  3. Texas Candy & Nut Co. v. HortonCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1950
  4. Beggs v. BrookerCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1934
  5. Zweifel v. Keystone Pipe & Supply Co.Court of Appeals of Texas · 1933

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

Powered by the Exa API