Beyersdorff v. Spillar, 11977.
| Decision Date | 26 October 1949 |
| Docket Number | No. 11977.,11977. |
| Citation | 224 S.W.2d 272 |
| Parties | BEYERSDORFF v. SPILLAR et al. |
| Court | Texas Court of Appeals |
Hardin & Little, Edinburg, for appellant.
Oxford & Ramsour, Edinburg, for appellees.
This is an appeal from an order dismissing appellant's suit upon the sustaining of a plea in abatement.
Appellees have neither filed a brief nor submitted oral argument, consequently, we accept as correct the statements in appellant's brief as to the facts and the record. Rule 419, Texas Rules of Civil Procedure. Headstream v. Mangum, Tex. Civ.App., 174 S.W.2d 496.
Appellant, Herman Beyersdorff, plaintiff below brought this suit for damages against B. A. Spillar, B. R. Bentley and Burton Benson, alleging that they had signed a bond which was made the basis of a writ of attachment in a certain cause then pending in the District Court of Hidalgo County, 92d District, styled San Pat Vegetable Co. v. Herman Beyersdorff, and bearing docket number A-7444. It was alleged that certain personal property of appellant was seized under the writ; that Spillar signed the bond as principal instead of the San Pat Vegetable Company; that the attachment was wrongfully issued and that as a result Beyersdorff suffered damages.
In their plea appellees asserted: ...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Clement v. Frantz
...224 S.W.2d 520 (writ refused); Doherty v. Jensen, Tex.Civ.App., 174 S.W.2d 77, modified 143 Tex. 64, 183 S.W.2d 453; Beyersdorff v. Spillar, Tex.Civ.App., 224 S.W.2d 272; Headstream v. Mangum, Tex.Civ.App., 174 S.W.2d Considering the case on this basis, the only time an agreement could have......
-
Bailey v. Parker, 6696
...without changing this rule in 143 Tex. 64, 183 S.W.2d 453; Headstream v. Mangum, Tex.Civ.App., 174 S.W.2d 496; Beyersdorff v. Spillar, Tex.Civ.App., 224 S.W.2d 272; Gonzales v. Gonzales, Tex.Civ.App., 224 S.W.2d 520; Howell v. Loftis, Tex.Civ.App., 299 S.W.2d Appellant asserts and cites the......
-
Howell v. Loftis
...Tex.Civ.App., 174 S.W.2d 77, reversed in part on other grounds, Pearson v. Doherty, 143 Tex. 64, 183 S.W.2d 453; Beyersdorff v. Spiller, Tex.Civ.App., 224 S.W.2d 272. It has also been held, in construing said rule, that where appellants complained by proper points of order overruling their ......
-
Texas Emp. Ins. Ass'n v. Baeza
...Austin 1932, writ dism'd); Forman v. Prince, 97 S.W.2d 1002, 1005 (Tex.Civ.App. Dallas 1936, no writ). Accord, Beyersdorff v. Spillar, 224 S.W.2d 272, 273 (Tex.Civ.App. San Antonio 1949, no writ). This principle is particularly applicable where, as here the dismissal would foreclose the ref......