Motor Supply Co. v. General Outdoor Advertising Co., 4109.
| Decision Date | 29 October 1931 |
| Docket Number | No. 4109.,4109. |
| Citation | 44 S.W.2d 507 |
| Parties | MOTOR SUPPLY CO. v. GENERAL OUTDOOR ADVERTISING CO. |
| Court | Texas Court of Appeals |
Appeal from Tarrant County Court; P. J. Small, Judge.
Action by the General Outdoor Advertising Company against the Motor Supply Company. From a judgment for plaintiff, defendant appeals.
Reversed and remanded.
The appellee brought the suit to recover of appellant $389.20 upon a written contract. Appellant answered by general denial, failure of consideration, and breach of contract. The case was tried before the court without a jury, and judgment was entered in favor of the appellee for the amount sued for. The appellant seeks to have the judgment reversed upon the errors assigned.
Under the written agreement in suit, which was executed in the state of New York, the appellee was to provide proper posters and have them put upon signboards in various places, to be approved by appellant, in the city of Fort Worth, Tex., during the four months of January, February, March, and April, 1930, as a means of outdoor advertising of "Philco Radio." The "cost per month" was to be $389.20, and the total cost was to be $1,556.80. The posters were shipped by appellee from New York City to Fort Worth. The appellee employed the United Advertising Corporation of Texas with office at Fort Worth, Tex., to paste the posters on the sign boards, a list of which places were selected by the United Advertising Corporation of Texas and submitted by it to the appellant for its approval. The list of locations of signboards was approved by the appellant. The posters were furnished and the service was performed for the month of January, 1930, and, because of the failure of the appellant to timely pay for that month, the appellee canceled the contract. The suit is for the amount due for January, 1930.
The appellant is a Texas corporation with office in Fort Worth. The appellee is, as alleged in its petition, a Delaware corporation, with its principal office and place of business in New York City.
Marvin H. Brown & Son, of Fort Worth, for appellant.
Johnson & White, E. S. Allen, and C. W. Goerte, all of Fort Worth, for appellee.
LEVY, J. (after stating the case as above).
The appellant presents for determination the points in view that (1) the evidence fails to show performance by appellee of the contract as agreed upon, and recovery as upon quantum meruit was not sought in the petition; and (2) the appellee sued as a foreign corporation on a contract to be performed in Texas...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Kutka v. Temporaries, Inc.
...1933, no writ); Finance Corp. of America v. Stone, 54 S.W.2d 254 (Tex.Civ.App. — Amarillo 1932 no writ); Motor Supply Co. v. General Outdoor Advertising Co., 44 S.W.2d 507 (Tex.Civ.App. — Texarkana 1931, no writ). Also, where the activities of a foreign corporation are at least in part of a......
-
Fate-Root-Heath Co. v. Howard Kenyon Dredging Co.
...38 S. Ct. 361, 62 L.Ed. 851; York Mfg. Co. v. Colley, 247 U.S. 21, 38 S.Ct. 430, 62 L.Ed. 963, 11 A.L.R. 611; Motor Supply Co. v. General Adv. Company, Tex.Civ.App., 44 S.W.2d 507; Alexander Co. v. Boxwell, Tex.Civ.App., 56 S.W.2d 676; Bryan v. Bowser & Co., Tex.Civ.App., 209 S.W. 189; Smyt......
-
Normandie Oil Corporation v. Oil Trading Co., 7863.
...Co., Tex. Civ.App., 171 S.W. 791; Elliott Electric Co. v. Clevenger, Tex.Civ.App., 300 S.W. 91; Motor Supply Co. v. General Outdoor Advertising Co., Tex.Civ.App., 44 S.W. 2d 507; Davis v. United Shoe Repairing Machine Co., Tex.Civ.App., 92 S.W.2d 1107; Fate-Root-Heath Co. v. Howard Kenyon D......
-
Western Outdoor Advertising Co. of Nebraska v. Berbiglia, Inc.
...App. 376, 34 N.E.2d 284; North American Service Co. v. A. T. Vick Co., Tex.Civ.App., 243 S.W. 549; Motor Supply Company v. General Outdoor Advertising Co., Tex.Civ.App., 44 S.W.2d 507; Cadden-Allen, Inc., v. Trans-Lux News Sign Corp., 254 Ala. 400, 48 So.2d In the cases of National Sign Cor......