Factors Co. v. Washburn Storage Co.

Court of Appeals of Texas

Factors Co. v. Washburn Storage Co.

371 S.W.2d 929, 1963 Tex. App. LEXIS 1764

CourtCourt of Appeals of Texas

DecidedOctober 24, 1963

DocketNo. 4175

StatusPublished

This text of 371 S.W.2d 929 (Factors Co. v. Washburn Storage Co.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Texas primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Factors Co. v. Washburn Storage Co., 371 S.W.2d 929, 1963 Tex. App. LEXIS 1764 (Tex. Ct. App. 1963).

Pincite

Opinion

WILSON, Justice.

Appellant, alleging it was assignee of a moving company, sued appellee for commissions alleged to be owed by the latter to the assignor. Appellant abandoned its action on a sworn account. Appellee pleaded payment, and other defenses unnecessary to be noticed. The court instructed a verdict for appellee.

Appellant introduced in evidence a series of assignments from the moving company assignor which recited transfer to appellant of “Bill Numbers” corresponding to the numbers on attached bills of lading in stated amounts.

Appellant seeks to convince us the assignments were valid. This is not the problem. The proof failed to show any debt was due from appellee. Appellant proved, in effect, that it purchased accounts receivable. It showed only the assignment, but failed to raise any issue that assignor had an enforceable chose or interest therein subject to its disposition, or that the purported chose assigned constituted a cause of action against appellee. In the absence of such proof the court properly instructed a verdict. Briscoe v. Texas Gen. Ins. Agency, Tex.Civ.App., 60 S.W.2d 814; Warren v. Sigmond Rothschild Co., Tex.Civ.App., 240 S.W. 1031; Jones v. Cunningham, Tex.Civ.App., 15 S.W. 38; 6 Tex.Jur.2d 452; 6 C.J. S. Assignments § 139, p. 1198; 6 Am.Jur.2d 315.

Affirmed.

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

WILSON, Justice.

Appellant, alleging it was assignee of a moving company, sued appellee for commissions alleged to be owed by the latter to the assignor. Appellant abandoned its action on a sworn account. Appellee pleaded payment, and other defenses unnecessary to be noticed. The court instructed a verdict for appellee.

Appellant introduced in evidence a series of assignments from the moving company assignor which recited transfer to appellant of “Bill Numbers” corresponding to the numbers on attached bills of lading in stated amounts.

Appellant seeks to convince us the assignments were valid. This is not the problem. The proof failed to show any debt was due from appellee. Appellant proved, in effect, that it purchased accounts receivable. It showed only the assignment, but failed to raise any issue that assignor had an enforceable chose or interest therein subject to its disposition, or that the purported chose assigned constituted a cause of action against appellee. In the absence of such proof the court properly instructed a verdict. Briscoe v. Texas Gen. Ins. Agency, Tex.Civ.App., 60 S.W.2d 814; Warren v. Sigmond Rothschild Co., Tex.Civ.App., 240 S.W. 1031; Jones v. Cunningham, Tex.Civ.App., 15 S.W. 38; 6 Tex.Jur.2d 452; 6 C.J. S. Assignments § 139, p. 1198; 6 Am.Jur.2d 315.

Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

371 S.W.2d 929, 1963 Tex. App. LEXIS 1764, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/factors-co-v-washburn-storage-co-texapp-1963.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack