W. O. Stringer v. Motors SEC.

Court of Appeals of Texas

W. O. Stringer v. Motors SEC.

17 S.W.2d 144, 1929 Tex. App. LEXIS 592

CourtCourt of Appeals of Texas

DecidedMay 10, 1929

DocketNo. 1813.

StatusPublished

This text of 17 S.W.2d 144 (W. O. Stringer v. Motors SEC.) 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

W. O. Stringer v. Motors SEC., 17 S.W.2d 144, 1929 Tex. App. LEXIS 592 (Tex. Ct. App. 1929).

Pincite

Opinion

HIGHTOWER, C. J.

In this case appellee, the Motors Securities Company, Inc., recovered a judgment against appellants, who were the defendants, for $1,073.16, with interest on that amount and attorney’s fees as prayed for by the appellee, and appellants in due time perfected their appeal to this court.

Appellants, as defendants below, sought to abate this suit on the same grounds that were urged by the defendants in cause No. 1812, S. G. Dyson et al. v. Motors Securities Co., Inc., 17 S.W.(2d) 141, this day decided by this court, in which a written opinion'was filed but is not yet officially reported. It is agreed by counsel for both sides that the material evidence touching the plea in abatement in this case is the same as the evidence touching the plea in abatement in the Dyson Case, and the judgment of the trial court, in overruling the plea in abatement in the instant case, is challenged on the- same grounds as those advanced in the Dyson Case.

We, overrule appellants’ contentions in this case for the same reason- that we overruled the contentions of appellants in the Dyson Case, and have ordered the judgment in this ease affirmed.

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

HIGHTOWER, C. J.

In this case appellee, the Motors Securities Company, Inc., recovered a judgment against appellants, who were the defendants, for $1,073.16, with interest on that amount and attorney’s fees as prayed for by the appellee, and appellants in due time perfected their appeal to this court.

Appellants, as defendants below, sought to abate this suit on the same grounds that were urged by the defendants in cause No. 1812, S. G. Dyson et al. v. Motors Securities Co., Inc., 17 S.W.(2d) 141, this day decided by this court, in which a written opinion'was filed but is not yet officially reported. It is agreed by counsel for both sides that the material evidence touching the plea in abatement in this case is the same as the evidence touching the plea in abatement in the Dyson Case, and the judgment of the trial court, in overruling the plea in abatement in the instant case, is challenged on the- same grounds as those advanced in the Dyson Case.

We, overrule appellants’ contentions in this case for the same reason- that we overruled the contentions of appellants in the Dyson Case, and have ordered the judgment in this ease affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

17 S.W.2d 144, 1929 Tex. App. LEXIS 592, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/w-o-stringer-v-motors-sec-texapp-1929.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack