Legal Opinion

State v. Mauritz-Wells Co.

Court of Appeals of Texas

Decided April 8, 1943No. 11515PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

CODY, Justice.

The Mauritz-Wells Company sued the Tyler Construction Company to recover a debt of approximately $1,200. In connection with said action in debt, the Mauritz-Wells Company sued out a writ of garnishment against the Humble Oil & Refining Company, hereafter referred to as the Humble. Then, in the writ of garnishment suit, the Humble answered that it owed the Tyler Construction Company $14,887.06. However, in connection with the said answer in the writ of garnishment suit, the Humble filed a bill of interpleader naming numerous parties, each of whom it alleged claimed that the Tyler…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Friedman v. American Surety Co. of New YorkTexas Supreme Court · 1941

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. State v. Mauritz-Wells Co.Texas Supreme Court · 1943
  2. John Deere Co. v. Butler County Implement, Inc.Supreme Court of Kansas · 1982
  3. Amegy Bank National Association F/K/A Southwest Bank of Texas, N.A. v. Southern Crushed Concrete, Inc., Texas Court of Appeals, 1st District (Houston)2009
  4. Untitled Texas Attorney General Opinion, Texas Attorney General Reports1948

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

Powered by the Exa API