Loving v. Laird

Texas Commission of Appeals

Loving v. Laird

61 S.W.2d 812

CourtTexas Commission of Appeals

DecidedJune 24, 1933

DocketNo. 1687—6189

StatusPublished

This text of 61 S.W.2d 812 (Loving v. Laird) 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

Loving v. Laird, 61 S.W.2d 812 (Tex. Super. Ct. 1933).

Pincite

Opinion

HARVEY, Presiding Judge.

In this suit, the trial court entered judgment against the plaintiff in error, Earl S. Loving, in favor of Mrs. Linnie Laird, individually, for the sum of $2,450, and in her favor, as next friend of her minor son, Pat Laird, in the sum of $8,000. The Court of Civil Appeals affirmed that judgment. 42 S.W.(2d) 483. The application of Loving, for the writ of error, has been duly granted by the Supreme Court. Since the granting of said application all interested parties to the suit have duly agreed that the judgment of the trial court be reformed, and as reformed affirmed. And it having been duly shown that Mrs. Laird has been duly appointed guardian of said minor, Pat Laird, and that the probate court, in which such guardianship proceeding is pending, has duly authorized Mrs. Laird, as guardian aforesaid, to- compromise this suit in behalf of said minor, on the terms set out in said agreement of the parties, we recommend that the motion to reform the judgment of the trial court, in accordance with said agreement of the :parties, be granted, and that the judgment of the trial court be reformed so as to allow a recovery against Loving in the sum of $1,172.22 in favor of Mrs. Linnie Laird, individually;. and in the sum of $3,827.18 in favor of Airs. Linnie Laird as guardian of Pat Laird, a minor, and as so reformed that the judgment of the trial court be affirmed.

CURETON, Chief Justice.

The judgments of the district court and Court of Civil Appeals are both reformed by agreement, and as reformed are affirmed, as recommended by the Commission of Appeals.

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

HARVEY, Presiding Judge.

In this suit, the trial court entered judgment against the plaintiff in error, Earl S. Loving, in favor of Mrs. Linnie Laird, individually, for the sum of $2,450, and in her favor, as next friend of her minor son, Pat Laird, in the sum of $8,000. The Court of Civil Appeals affirmed that judgment. 42 S.W.(2d) 483. The application of Loving, for the writ of error, has been duly granted by the Supreme Court. Since the granting of said application all interested parties to the suit have duly agreed that the judgment of the trial court be reformed, and as reformed affirmed. And it having been duly shown that Mrs. Laird has been duly appointed guardian of said minor, Pat Laird, and that the probate court, in which such guardianship proceeding is pending, has duly authorized Mrs. Laird, as guardian aforesaid, to- compromise this suit in behalf of said minor, on the terms set out in said agreement of the parties, we recommend that the motion to reform the judgment of the trial court, in accordance with said agreement of the :parties, be granted, and that the judgment of the trial court be reformed so as to allow a recovery against Loving in the sum of $1,172.22 in favor of Mrs. Linnie Laird, individually;. and in the sum of $3,827.18 in favor of Airs. Linnie Laird as guardian of Pat Laird, a minor, and as so reformed that the judgment of the trial court be affirmed.

CURETON, Chief Justice.

The judgments of the district court and Court of Civil Appeals are both reformed by agreement, and as reformed are affirmed, as recommended by the Commission of Appeals.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

61 S.W.2d 812, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/loving-v-laird-texcommnapp-1933.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack