South Chester Tube Co. v. Texhoma Oil & Refining Co.

Texas Commission of Appeals

South Chester Tube Co. v. Texhoma Oil & Refining Co.

287 S.W. 1111, 1926 Tex. App. LEXIS 1638

CourtTexas Commission of Appeals

DecidedNovember 17, 1926

DocketMotion No. 7281; No. 711-4268

StatusPublished

This text of 287 S.W. 1111 (South Chester Tube Co. v. Texhoma Oil & Refining Co.) 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

South Chester Tube Co. v. Texhoma Oil & Refining Co., 287 S.W. 1111, 1926 Tex. App. LEXIS 1638 (Tex. Super. Ct. 1926).

Pincite

Opinion

POWELL, P. J.

On the 27th day of October, 1926, counsel for all parties in the above entitled and numbered cause filed in writing their joint motion reading as follows: “Whereas, the parties to the above cause have adjusted and compromised the same, it is respectfully prayed by both parties that the petition for writ of error in said cause be novv dismissed, at the cost of the plaintiff in error.” We have considered the motion, and are of the view that it should be granted. Therefore we recommend that the writ of error herein be dismissed, at the cost of plaintiff in error.

CURETON, C. J.

Dismissed on agreed motion to dismiss, as recommended by the Commission of Appeals.

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

POWELL, P. J.

On the 27th day of October, 1926, counsel for all parties in the above entitled and numbered cause filed in writing their joint motion reading as follows: “Whereas, the parties to the above cause have adjusted and compromised the same, it is respectfully prayed by both parties that the petition for writ of error in said cause be novv dismissed, at the cost of the plaintiff in error.” We have considered the motion, and are of the view that it should be granted. Therefore we recommend that the writ of error herein be dismissed, at the cost of plaintiff in error.

CURETON, C. J.

Dismissed on agreed motion to dismiss, as recommended by the Commission of Appeals.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

287 S.W. 1111, 1926 Tex. App. LEXIS 1638, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/south-chester-tube-co-v-texhoma-oil-refining-co-texcommnapp-1926.