City of Dallas v. Texas Employers' Ins.

Texas Commission of Appeals

City of Dallas v. Texas Employers' Ins.

265 S.W. 1113, 1924 Tex. App. LEXIS 1459

CourtTexas Commission of Appeals

DecidedOctober 22, 1924

DocketNo. 3927

StatusPublished

This text of 265 S.W. 1113 (City of Dallas v. Texas Employers' Ins.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Texas Commission of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

City of Dallas v. Texas Employers' Ins., 265 S.W. 1113, 1924 Tex. App. LEXIS 1459 (Tex. Super. Ct. 1924).

Pincite

Opinion

STAYTON, J.

The defendant in error shows by sworn motion that it has paid to plaintiff in error the full amount of taxes, interest, penalties, etc., involved in the suit against it, and has either paid or is ready to pay all of the costs of court. The plaintiff in error has not contested the motion. Upon the authority of Padgitt v. Young County, 111 Tex. 98, 229 S. W. 459, and Richmond et ux. v. Hog Creek Oil Co. et al. (Tex. Com. App.) 239 S. W. 904, the questions involved in the case in this court have become moot, and it should be dismissed. We therefore recommend that the writ of error be dismissed, and that the costs of the Supreme Court be adjudged against the defendant in error.

CURETON, C. J. Writ of error dismissed,in accordance with the recommendations of the Commission of Appeals.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

STAYTON, J.

The defendant in error shows by sworn motion that it has paid to plaintiff in error the full amount of taxes, interest, penalties, etc., involved in the suit against it, and has either paid or is ready to pay all of the costs of court. The plaintiff in error has not contested the motion. Upon the authority of Padgitt v. Young County, 111 Tex. 98, 229 S. W. 459, and Richmond et ux. v. Hog Creek Oil Co. et al. (Tex. Com. App.) 239 S. W. 904, the questions involved in the case in this court have become moot, and it should be dismissed. We therefore recommend that the writ of error be dismissed, and that the costs of the Supreme Court be adjudged against the defendant in error.

CURETON, C. J. Writ of error dismissed,in accordance with the recommendations of the Commission of Appeals.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

265 S.W. 1113, 1924 Tex. App. LEXIS 1459, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/city-of-dallas-v-texas-employers-ins-texcommnapp-1924.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack