Robertson v. Blackwell Zinc Co., A-10536

• Decision Date: 28 April 1965
• Docket Number: No. A-10536,A-10536
• Citation: Robertson v. Blackwell Zinc Co., 390 S.W.2d 472 (Tex. 1965)
• Parties: French M. ROBERTSON, Petitioner, v. BLACKWELL ZINC COMPANY, INC., et al., Respondents.
• Court: Texas Supreme Court

Page 472

390 S.W.2d 472

French M. ROBERTSON, Petitioner, v.BLACKWELL ZINC COMPANY, INC., et al., Respondents.

No. A-10536.

Supreme Court of Texas.

April 28, 1965.

Rehearing Denied June 2, 1965.

King Willoughby, Vletas & Dickenson, Abilene, Clark, Thomas, Harris, Denius & Winters and James H. Keahey, Austin, for petitioner.

Perkins, Bezoni & Kirwan, Stubbeman, McRae, Sealy & Laughlin, Midland, Paul Petty, Ballinger, Black & Stayton, Austin, Hudson, Keltner, Smith & Cunningham, Fort Worth, Phipps, Smith & Alexander, McLeod, Mills, Shirley & Alexander, Galveston, Dean Moorhead, Austin, for respondents.

PER CURIAM.

The Court of Civil Appeals correctly held that there was a defect in partiesdefendant and that the judgment rendered by the trial court should be reversed and the cause remanded for new trial.Ambassador Oil Co. v. Robertson, 384 S.W.2d 752.The issue upon which this holding was based was properly presented by application for writ of error to the Court of Civil Appeals filed by parties not expressly named as defendants in the plaintiff's trial petition but considered as parties to the suit by the trial court under the doctrine of virtual representation.Rule 42,Texas Rules of Civil Procedure.Such parties did not participate in person...