Motor Securities Corp. v. Fulbright

Court of Appeals of Texas

Motor Securities Corp. v. Fulbright

81 S.W.2d 1047, 1935 Tex. App. LEXIS 428

CourtCourt of Appeals of Texas

DecidedApril 18, 1935

DocketNo. 2746.

StatusPublished

This text of 81 S.W.2d 1047 (Motor Securities Corp. v. Fulbright) 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

Motor Securities Corp. v. Fulbright, 81 S.W.2d 1047, 1935 Tex. App. LEXIS 428 (Tex. Ct. App. 1935).

Pincite

Opinion

WALKER, Chief Justice.

This appeal is from an order overruling appellant’s plea of privilege to be sued in precinct No. 1 of Harris county. The plea of privilege in all respects complied with the provisions of the statute. The court’s judgment overruling the plea of privilege was erroneous in the following respects: (a) The controverting affidavit was insufficient in that it failed to make the petition a part of the affidavit, and, tested by its own allegations, it failed to allege any cause of action against appellant, Henderson Grain Company v. Russ, 122 Tex. 620, 64 S.W.(2d) 347 (b), and it affirmatively appears from the recitations of the judgment that no proof was offered by appellee in support of venue. Automobile Bankers’ Corp. v. Woodyard (Tex. Civ. App.) 65 S.W.(2d) 410.

The judgment of the lower court is reversed, and the cause remanded, with instructions to transfer the case to justice court precinct No. 1, Harris county, Tex.

Reversed and remanded, with instructions.

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

WALKER, Chief Justice.

This appeal is from an order overruling appellant’s plea of privilege to be sued in precinct No. 1 of Harris county. The plea of privilege in all respects complied with the provisions of the statute. The court’s judgment overruling the plea of privilege was erroneous in the following respects: (a) The controverting affidavit was insufficient in that it failed to make the petition a part of the affidavit, and, tested by its own allegations, it failed to allege any cause of action against appellant, Henderson Grain Company v. Russ, 122 Tex. 620, 64 S.W.(2d) 347 (b), and it affirmatively appears from the recitations of the judgment that no proof was offered by appellee in support of venue. Automobile Bankers’ Corp. v. Woodyard (Tex. Civ. App.) 65 S.W.(2d) 410.

The judgment of the lower court is reversed, and the cause remanded, with instructions to transfer the case to justice court precinct No. 1, Harris county, Tex.

Reversed and remanded, with instructions.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

81 S.W.2d 1047, 1935 Tex. App. LEXIS 428, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/motor-securities-corp-v-fulbright-texapp-1935.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack