South Texas Telephone Co. v. Huntington

138 S.W. 381
Texas Supreme Court·Decided June 23, 1911·Published·Cited by 10 cases

Opinion

BROWN, C. J.

Upon a consideration ol' this motion, we have concluded to set aside the judgment rendered in this court, and to remand the case for trial upon the issue of the right of the plaintiffs below to an injunction to restrain the sale of other bonds and also upon their claim for damages arising from a failure to invest the $50,000 in betterments of the plant. The damages, however, must be confined to the effect of that failure upon the market value of the bonds; such damages to be limited to the difference between the market value of the bonds without the investment and what would probably have been their market value if the investment had been made, not to exceed their face value. The company cannot be held for a sum greater than ,the face value of the bonds.

It is ordered that the judgment rendered be set aside, and that the case be remanded for trial in accordance herewith.

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

South Texas Telephone Co. v. Huntington, 138 S.W. 381 (Tex. 1911).

138 S.W. 381 (South Texas Telephone Co. v. Huntington) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Link v. Texas Pharmacal Company
276 S.W.2d 903 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1955)
West v. Continental Oil Co.
91 F. Supp. 505 (S.D. Texas, 1950)
Bevil v. Kirby Lumber Co.
58 S.W.2d 843 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1933)
Ryan v. Kent
36 S.W.2d 1007 (Texas Commission of Appeals, 1931)
Branom v. Scott
24 S.W.2d 499 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1930)
Rosek v. Kotzur
267 S.W. 759 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1924)
Stevens v. Galveston, H. & S. A. Ry. Co.
212 S.W. 639 (Texas Commission of Appeals, 1919)
Nations v. Williams
203 S.W. 1176 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1918)
Daggett v. City of Ft. Worth
177 S.W. 222 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1915)
Closner v. Chapin
168 S.W. 370 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1914)