Lloyds Alliance v. Cook

Decision Date10 May 1956
Docket NumberNo. 3337,3337
Citation290 S.W.2d 716
PartiesLLOYDS ALLIANCE et al., Appellants, v. John C. COOK et al., Appellees.
CourtTexas Court of Appeals

Wm. G. Washington, Austin, for appellants.

Bradley & Geren, Groesbeck, for appellees.

HALE, Justice.

This appeal grew out of a venue proceeding. John C. Cook and George Cook, hereafter referred to as the Cooks, joined by James T. Oliver, hereafter referred to as Oliver, brought this suit as plaintiffs in the District Court of Limestone County against Lloyds Alliance, Western Alliance, Texas Casualty Insurance Company and John W. Washington as defendants. It appears that a plea of privilege was duly filed on behalf of each defendant, asserting the right to be sued in Travis County, and that a controverting affidavit was duly filed on behalf of each plaintiff to each of the pleas of privilege. After a hearing before the trial court without the aid of a jury on the issues joined by the pleadings relating to venue, the court sustained the pleas of privilege of Texas Casualty Insurance Company and John W. Washington and transferred the causes of action of the plaintiffs as against these two defendants to the District Court of Travis County but overruled the pleas of privilege of Lloyds Alliance and Western Alliance to be sued in Travis County. Lloyds Alliance and Western Alliance have appealed and they will hereafter be referred to as appellants.

It is well settled that by the filing of their pleas of privilege in due form at the time and in the manner required by law, appellants thereby acquired the legal right to have the actions asserted against them by the Cooks and by Oliver transferred to Travis County unless the latter thereafter established by proper pleading and proof that one or more exceptions to exclusive venue in the county of one's residence, as provided by law, existed in the cause declared upon by the Cooks and Oliver, respectively.

In their controverting affidavits the Cooks and Oliver set forth verbatim the joint petition upon which they sued and it was asserted in each controverting affidavit that their suit came within subdivisions 23, 28 and 28a of Art. 1995, Vernon's Tex.Civ.Stats. The Cooks alleged in substance that appellants had issued a policy to them covering a truck which had been damaged, that appellants had failed to pay their damage claim and that they were suing for the recovery thereof.

Oliver was local agent of appellants in the issuance and delivery of the policy of insurance sued upon by the Cooks. When appellants failed to effect a settlement that was satisfactory to the Cooks of their damage claim, Oliver refused to pay appellants certain premiums he had collected for them on policies they had issued. Thereupon, appellants sued Oliver in Travis County for the premiums which he had collected for them, recovered final judgments against him in such suits and caused an abstract of each judgment to be filed in Limestone County. After such abstract of judgments had been so filed in Limestone County, appellants wrote a letter to the Board of Insurance Commissioners informing it of the judgments they had procured against Oliver and asking the Board if it could give any assistance to appellants in collecting the judgments.

In the joint petition on behalf of the Cooks and Oliver herein relied upon for recovery, Oliver alleged that he had been damaged by the wrongful conduct of appellants in causing the abstract of the two judgments rendered against him in Travis County to be filed in Limestone County and by the writing of the letter to the Board of Insurance Commissioners referred to above. He sought to recover damages, actual and exemplary, against appellants on account of such alleged wrongful conduct on their part and to have appellants...

To continue reading

Request your trial
6 cases
  • Heimann v. Adee
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of New Mexico
    • September 23, 1996
    ...case law in other states supports our determination of the significance of that clause. For example, in Lloyds Alliance v. Cook, 290 S.W.2d 716 (Tex.Civ.Ct.App.1956), the court considered the significance of a Texas statute that provided that "writs of injunction to stay execution on a judg......
  • Shor v. Pelican Oil & Gas Mgmt., LLC
    • United States
    • Court of Appeals of Texas
    • February 26, 2013
    ...in the court rendering such judgment, rather than in other courts indiscriminately.” McVeigh, 849 S.W.2d at 914 (quoting Lloyds Alliance v. Cook, 290 S.W.2d 716, 718 (Tex.Civ.App.-Waco 1956, no writ)). We further held that not only does section 65.023(b) control venue in a suit for an injun......
  • McVeigh v. Lerner
    • United States
    • Court of Appeals of Texas
    • March 18, 1993
    ...upon their judgments should be made in the court rendering such judgment, rather than in other courts indiscriminately." Lloyds Alliance v. Cook, 290 S.W.2d 716, 718 (Tex.Civ.App.--Waco 1956, no writ) (concerning TEX.REV.CIV.STAT.ANN. art. 4656, the predecessor statute of section 65.023). T......
  • Damron v. Fireman's Fund Ins. Co., 7771
    • United States
    • Court of Appeals of Texas. Court of Civil Appeals of Texas
    • June 17, 1968
    ...court did not abuse its discretion in refusing to consolidate the two cases; one in contract and the other in tort. Lloyds Alliance v. Cook, Tex.Civ.App., 290 S.W.2d 716. Appellants' last point of error is directed to the action of the trial court in granting appellee's motion for instructe......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT