Home Inv. Co. v. Strange

204 S.W. 314, 109 Tex. 350, 1918 Tex. LEXIS 102
CourtTexas Supreme Court
DecidedJune 28, 1918
DocketNo. 2516
StatusPublished
Cited by22 cases

This text of 204 S.W. 314 (Home Inv. Co. v. Strange) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Texas Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Home Inv. Co. v. Strange, 204 S.W. 314, 109 Tex. 350, 1918 Tex. LEXIS 102 (Tex. 1918).

Opinion

HAWKINS, J.

Upon consideration of the motion of plaintiffs in error for a rehearing we adhere to the conclusions announced in our former opinion. Accordingly, said motion will be overruled. „

Our former order remanding this cause was based upon the fact that the amounts of purchase money paid out by Moroney or under his directions had not been’ ascertained by the jury. The motion of defendant in error for a rehearing, and to reform and affirm, avers that all such amounts, and dates of payment thereof, are disclosed by the undisputed evidence of Moroney himself, and makes a tabulation of the various items, giving the largest amounts claimed by Moroney, listing several items of court costs and taxes with the admission that, possibly, they also may constitute purchase money, and requests that judgment in favor of Moroney and the Home Investment Company therefor, with interest at 6 per cent, per annum down to the date of the judgment in the trial court, be now here entered. To that request we accede. Land Co. v. McClelland, 86 Tex. 188, 23 S. W. 576, 1100, 22 L. R. A. 105; Wilkin v. Owens, 102 Tex. 197, 114 S. W. 104, 115 S. W. 1174, 117 S. W. 425, 132 Am. St. Rep. 867. The aggregate of said items, principal and interest, is $1,576.27 as calculated by counsel for Strange, but really is $1,672.11. Said motion will be granted, and the judgments of the Court of Civil Appeals and the [315]*315district court, respectively, will be so reformed as to allow, as of date of the judg-, ment of the district court — July 1, 1911 — up-; on the judgment in favor of Strange for $6,600 besides interest, a credit of $1,672.11; and, as so reformed, said judgments will be affirmed.

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

Related

State v. Lemon
603 S.W.2d 313 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1980)
Rucker v. Butcher
300 S.W.2d 183 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1957)
Ryan v. Plath
140 P.2d 968 (Washington Supreme Court, 1943)
Ulmer v. Ulmer
152 S.W.2d 383 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1941)
Hall v. Miller
147 S.W.2d 266 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1941)
Moseley v. Fikes
126 S.W.2d 589 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1939)
Cawthon v. Cochell
121 S.W.2d 414 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1938)
Martinez v. Southwest Bitulithic Co.
119 S.W.2d 740 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1938)
Harris v. Ware
93 S.W.2d 598 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1936)
Bush v. Gaffney
84 S.W.2d 759 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1935)
Isaacs v. Neece
75 F.2d 566 (Fifth Circuit, 1935)
Prim v. Farmers' Nat. Bank of Dublin
51 S.W.2d 684 (Texas Commission of Appeals, 1932)
Furche v. Sailer
8 S.W.2d 334 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1928)
Miller v. Miller
283 S.W. 1085 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1926)
Burney v. Burney
261 S.W. 182 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1924)
Hand v. Errington
248 S.W. 25 (Texas Commission of Appeals, 1923)
Carl v. Settegast
237 S.W. 238 (Texas Commission of Appeals, 1922)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
204 S.W. 314, 109 Tex. 350, 1918 Tex. LEXIS 102, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/home-inv-co-v-strange-tex-1918.