Legal Opinion

E. L. Bruce Co. v. Hannon

Court of Appeals of Texas

Decided March 13, 1926No. 3187PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the Court

Two questions are presented by the record and urged by the appellant as error. First: Did the district court have jurisdiction to entertain and try the proceedings in the special circumstances? The officer forthwith levied the original attachment writ at different times and places upon an amount of property as a whole sufficient to satisfy the writ. Each separate seizure was of an amount of property insufficient to raise the sum necessary to enforce the writ. The claimant promptly made claim, secured by bond, to the property seized at the different dates. Appellant insists that the two…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Dahnke-Walker Milling Co. v. BondurantSupreme Court of the United States · 1921
  2. American Express Co. v. IowaSupreme Court of the United States · 1905
  3. Texas & Pacific Railway Co. v. DavisTexas Supreme Court · 1900
  4. Houston Oil Co. of Texas v. BoykinTexas Supreme Court · 1918
  5. Elser v. GraberTexas Supreme Court · 1887

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

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Elliott Addressing MacH. Co. v. CampbellCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1942

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

Powered by the Exa API