Clement v. Producers' Refining Co.
Decision Date | 02 December 1925 |
Docket Number | (No. 773-4375.) |
Citation | 277 S.W. 634 |
Parties | CLEMENT v. PRODUCERS' REFINING CO. |
Court | Texas Supreme Court |
Action by W. J. Clement against the Producers' Refining Company. Judgment for plaintiff was affirmed by the Court of Civil Appeals (270 S. W. 206), and plaintiff, deeming relief insufficient, brings error. Affirmed in part, and reversed in part, and remanded.
Stuart, Bell & Moore, of Gainesville, for plaintiff in error.
Phillips, Trammell & Chizum, of Fort Worth, and H. O. Caster, of Bartlesville, Okl., for defendant in error.
W. J. Clement, plaintiff in error, and the Home Petroleum Company entered into the following written contract:
Thereafter the Home Petroleum Company was dissolved, and defendant in error, Producers' Refining Company, took over its business, including this contract. There is evidence showing that under the terms of the contract Clement, at considerable expense, furnished equipment, barrels, horses, wagons, and trucks, which he used in the conduct of the business, and that under his management the business increased until the commissions to which he was entitled amounted to several hundred dollars per month. On about the 29th of September, 1917, he was discharged by the Producers' Refining Company.
He sought in this suit to recover commissions on sales of goods and products which he had made, and also for damages for wrongful discharge. The trial court directed a verdict in his favor...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Fox Film Corp. v. Tri-State Theatres
...Olin Co. v. Lambach, 35 Idaho 767, at 769, 44 A. L. R. 354, 209 P. 277; Clement v. Producers' Ref. Co., (Tex. Civ. App.) 270 S.W. 206, 277 S.W. 634.) J. Lee, C. J., and Budge, Givens and Varian, JJ., concur. OPINION MCNAUGHTON, J. This is an action by the Fox Film Corporation against Tri-St......
-
Big Four Ice & Cold Storage Co. v. Williams
...Texas Seed & Floral Co. v. Chicago Set & Seed Co. (Tex. Civ. App.) 187 S. W. 747, 749, 751 (writ refused); Clement v. Producers' Refining Co. (Tex. Com. App.) 277 S. W. 634, 635, 636; Stanley v. Sumrell (Tex. Civ. App.) 163 S. W. 697, 699; Crosby v. De Bord (Tex. Civ. App.) 155 S. W. 647, 6......
-
Bales v. General Insurance Co., of America
...O. A. Olin Co. v. Lambach, 35 Idaho 767, 209 P. 277, 44 A. L. R. 354; Clement v. Producers' Refining Co., (Tex. Civ. App.) 270 S.W. 206, 277 S.W. 634.) Respondent must prove all of the essentials of an enforceable written contract of insurance, namely: (1) definite parties, (2) definite pro......
-
Vincent v. Bell
...v. Producers' Ref. Co. (Tex. Civ. App.) 270 S. W. 206 (writ was granted in above case, but not on question here involved, see [Com. App.] 277 S. W. 634); H. & T. C. Ry. Co. v. McDade et al. (Tex. Civ. App.) 295 S. W. 318 (writ refused); Carpenter v. Dressler, 76 Ark. 400, 89 S. W. 89; Wilhe......