Legal Opinion

Galbreath v. Farrell

Court of Appeals of Texas

Decided April 23, 1925No. 3044PublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

WILLSON, O. J.

(after stating the facts as above). The judgment now complained of is not erroneous if the judgment in the former suit operated to bar the recovery sought by appellants in this one. It did so operate if appellants’ “cause of action” in that suit was the same as their “cause of action” in this one, for it is settled law (34 C. J. 743, 750, and authorities there cited) that:

“The judgment or decree of a court of competent jurisdiction upon the merits concludes the parties and privies to the litigation and constitutes a bar to a new action or suit involving the same cause of action.”

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Philipowski v. SpencerTexas Supreme Court · 1885
  2. Corrugated Culvert Co. v. Simpson Tp., McIntosh Cty.Supreme Court of Oklahoma · 1915
  3. Dizon v. WatsonCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1908
  4. Grayson County Bank v. WandelohrTexas Supreme Court · 1912
  5. Mallory v. Dawson Cotton Oil Co.Court of Appeals of Texas · 1903

4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. Martin v. Phillips Petroleum CompanyCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1970
  2. Carter v. BacleCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1936
  3. Slack v. Allen Military AcademyCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1956
  4. Farrell v. YoungCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1929
  5. Puls v. ClarkCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1947

2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API