Legal Opinion

Hurlbut & Semple v. Boaz

Court of Appeals of Texas

Decided October 4, 1893No. 246PublishedCited by 10 opinions

Tried below before Hon. J. W. Timmins.

1Opinion of the Court

FISHER, Chief Justice.

This is an action for damages, instituted by appellee against the appellants, growing out of an alleged malicious prosecution of the appellee at the instance of appellants, charging him with the offense of embezzlement.

The trial below resulted in a verdict and judgment against the appellants for $4000 as actual and $4000 as exemplary damages.

At the trial of the case, witness Cole, over the objection of the appellants, was permitted to testify, that in a conversation he had with appellee, Boaz, at Fort Worth, he stated to appellee that “he (Boaz) could not blame Hurlbut &…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. McManus v. WallisTexas Supreme Court · 1880
  2. S. Jacobs, Bernheim & Co. v. CrumTexas Supreme Court · 1884
  3. Gray v. BurkTexas Supreme Court · 1857
  4. Houston East & West Texas Railway Co. v. BlaggeTexas Supreme Court · 1889

3Cited by10 opinions

  1. Deshawn Gervin v. Pamela FlorenceCourt of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 2025
  2. Reed v. LindleyCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1922
  3. American Motors Finance Co. v. ClecklerCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1930
  4. Dorn & McGinty v. CooperSupreme Court of Iowa · 1908
  5. People v. ConverseCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1915

5 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