Harrigan v. Wolff
Decision Date | 15 May 1929 |
Docket Number | (No. 8223.) |
Citation | 18 S.W.2d 679 |
Parties | HARRIGAN v. WOLFF. |
Court | Texas Court of Appeals |
Appeal from County Court at Law, No. 2, Bexar County; George G. Clifton, Judge.
Action by Jacob Wolff against D. D. Harrigan. Judgment for plaintiff, and defendant appeals. Affirmed.
Thomson, Dilworth & Marshall, of San Antonio, for appellant.
Templeton, Brooks, Napier & Brown, of San Antonio, for appellee.
Appellee sued appellant for a balance due on a written contract for drilling a well on the "Burns Ranch" in possession of appellant.
There were two written contracts. Appellee put himself in a position to perform the contract and spent money to begin its work. Appellant becoming anxious to terminate the contract, the parties entered into the following agreement in duplicate:
The main defense is that the contract is void for lack of consideration. We think there is nothing in that position, as the contract is and was entirely valid.
Neither party cites any authorities whatever, and to us this seems but a simple case involving an enforcible, valid contract.
We do not think there is any merit in appella...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Cole v. Loma Plastics
... ... Civ.App., 229 S.W.2d 936; Northwestern Oil & Gas Co. v. Branine, 71 Okl. 107, 175 P. 533, 3 A.L.R. 344 ... 12 Harrigan v. Wolff, Tex.Civ.App., 18 S. W.2d 679 ... 13 Solomon v. Waterbury Brass Goods Corp., 2 Cir., 6 F.2d 990; Southwest Dairy ... ...