Torrez v. Maryland Casualty Company
| Decision Date | 28 November 1962 |
| Docket Number | No. A-9261,A-9261 |
| Citation | 363 S.W.2d 235 |
| Parties | Frank M. TORREZ, Appellant, v. MARYLAND CASUALTY COMPANY, Respondent. |
| Court | Texas Supreme Court |
Scarborough, Black & Tarpley, Abilene, A. C. Cooke, Post, for petitioner.
Crenshaw, Dupree & Milam, Lubbock, Cecil Kuhne, Jr., Lubbock, for respondent.
(1) This is a plea of privilege case. The Court of Civil Appeals has held that Subdivision 27 of Article 1995, Vernon's Ann.Tex.Stats. is unconstitutional in that it denies to foreign corporations the equal protection of the law guaranteed by the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States. 359 S.W.2d 559. No dissenting opinion was filed in the lower appellate court, consequently our jurisdiction depends entirely upon there being a conflict of decisions, that is, the application for writ of error must show that the Court of Civil Appeals has held differently from a prior decision of another Court of Civil Appeals, or of the Supreme Court, upon a question of law material to a decision of the case. Article 1728. Articles 1728 and 1821 relating to the jurisdictions of the Supreme Court and the Courts of Civil Appeals were amended in 1953. The primary objective of the amendments was 'to substitute the comparatively simple writ of error for the complicated mandamus-certified question practice in certain types of cases, such as divorce and slander cases and appeals from interlocutory orders, including those sustaining or overruling pleas or privilege.' The actual appellate jurisdiction of the Supreme Court was left substantially unchanged. See Commentaries under Rule 474, Vernon's Ann.Tex.Rules, 16 Texas Bar Journal 602.
(2) When a conflict of decisions is relied upon for Supreme Court jurisdiction the application should briefly and pointedly show wherein the decisions are in conflict. The conflict must be apparent from the face of the opinions and must relate to a question of law. 'Generalized conflicting statements from two opinions do not create a jurisdictional conflict.' Calvert, 'The Application for Writ of Error'-Commentaries under Rule 469, Vernon's Ann.Tex.Rules.
(3) It is asserted that the decision in the present case conflicts with Southwestern Greyhound Lines v. Day, Tex.Civ.App., 238 S.W.2d 258, no wr. hist., Pacific Finance Corporation v. Robert F. Ramsey, Tex.Civ.App., 305 S.W.2d 297, no wr. hist., Andretta v. West, Tex.Civ.App., 318 S.W.2d 768, wr. ref. n. r. e., and Kansas City...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Southwestern Bell Tel. Co. v. Thomas
...1959, no writ) and Maryland Casualty Company v. Torrez, 359 S.W.2d 559 (Tex.Civ.App.--Eastland 1962, dism'd w.o.j.; 363 S.W.2d 235 (Tex.)). The Supreme Court of Texas has recently held that this Subdivision is not unconstitutional. Commercial Insurance Company of Newark, New Jersey v. Adams......
-
Commercial Ins. Co. of Newark, N. J. v. Adams
...should not be understood as implying that said subdivision 27 is unconstitutional or that the contrary is true.' Torrez v. Maryland Casualty Co., 363 S.W.2d 235 (Tex.Sup.). This Court, therefore, must determine the question of the constitutionality of Subdivision 27 after consideration of a......
-
Coastal Corp. v. Garza
...ch. 424, § 1, 1953 Tex. Gen. Laws 1026.11 Hajek v. Bill Mowbray Motors, Inc., 647 S.W.2d 253, 254 (Tex.1983). See Torrez v. Maryland Cas. Co., 363 S.W.2d 235, 236 (Tex.1962) (explaining that the primary objective of the 1953 amendments was " 'to substitute the comparatively simple writ of e......
-
Bland ISD v. Blue
...v. Wynn, 301 S.W.2d 76, 79 (Tex. 1957); accord, John Farrell Lumber Co. v. Wood, 400 S.W.2d 307, 309 (Tex. 1966); Torrez v. Maryland Cas. Co., 363 S.W.2d 235, 236 (Tex. 1962); Employers Cas. Co. v. National Bank of Commerce, 166 S.W.2d 691, 693 (Tex. 1942); Dockum v. Mercury Ins. Co., 135 S......