Legal Opinion

De Proy v. Progakis

Court of Appeals of Texas

Decided December 22, 1923No. 10464. [fn*]Published

1Opinion

On Motion for Rehearing.

Plaintiffs in error, Mrs. Ogda De Proy and August De Proy, have filed a motion for rehearing in which it is stated that in the opinion of counsel representing them the questions discussed upon original hearing were correctly determined in every material respect. But in their motion for rehearing they now for the first time present new assignments of error, substantially to the effect that the judgment of the trial court should be reversed, because, as alleged in the motion.: First, the defendant August De Proy was a minor, and was not personally served with citation to…

2Cases cited17 opinions

  1. Houston Oil Co. of Texas v. KimballTexas Supreme Court · 1910
  2. Western Union Telegraph Co. v. HudsonTexas Supreme Court · 1910
  3. Fuqua, Hinkle & Davis v. Pabst Brewing Co.Texas Supreme Court · 1897
  4. Wilson v. JohnsonTexas Supreme Court · 1900
  5. Wallis, Landes & Co. v. StuartTexas Supreme Court · 1899

12 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