Victor Refining Co. v. City Nat. Bank
| Decision Date | 24 June 1925 |
| Docket Number | (No. 4273.) |
| Citation | 274 S.W. 561 |
| Court | Texas Supreme Court |
| Parties | VICTOR REFINING CO. et al. v. CITY NAT. BANK OF COMMERCE et al.<SMALL><SUP>*</SUP></SMALL> |
Consolidated suits by the City National Bank of Commerce and others against the Victor Refining Company and other defendants, who interpleaded additional parties defendant. The Court of Civil Appeals affirmed (263 S. W. 622) the judgment of the district court, save as to one plaintiff, and interpleaded defendants bring error. Affirmed.
Taylor & Taylor and J. L. Lackey, all of Wichita Falls, for plaintiffs in error.
John B. King, Leslie Humphrey, and Bullington, Boone & Humphrey, all of Wichita Falls, for defendants in error.
Bonner, Bonner & Sanford, of Wichita Falls, for certain appellees.
Several suits were brought in the district court of Wichita county by the City National Bank of Commerce and others against the Victor Refining Company, alleged to be a joint-stock association, and a number of individuals, alleged to be partners in the association. The suits were to enforce obligations incurred by the refining company in the transaction of its business. The original individual defendants interpleaded other individuals, seeking contributions from them to any judgment recovered by the plaintiffs; the association having become insolvent.
The several suits were consolidated, and the trial resulted in judgment for the respective plaintiffs against the original defendants for large sums, with judgment in favor of the original individual defendants for contributions from the interpleaded individual defendants. No question is raised as to the status of the Victor Refining Company as a voluntary, unincorporated, joint-stock association, engaged in an industrial enterprise.
Some of the interpleaded defendants appealed from the judgment of the district court, which was affirmed, save as to the recovery awarded one of the plaintiffs. 263 S. W. 622. The appealing interpleaded defendants thereupon sued out a writ of error, and complain that there was error in the action of the district court in refusing to allow them to prove notice to the plaintiffs of a clause in the declaration of trust under which the refining company was formed, to the effect that no personal liability should be incurred by the stockholders on obligations of the company. The articles of association, under which the company was organized, empower the trustees to control...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Darling v. Buddy
...220 S.W. 1019; Weber Engine Co. v. Alter, 245 Pac. 143; Harris v. Oil Co., 204 Pac. 754; Thompson v. Schmitt, 274 S.W. 554; Victor Refining Co. v. Bank, 274 S.W. 561, 263 S.W. 622; McCamey v. Hollister Oil Co., 241 S.W. 699, 274 S.W. (Tex. Sup.) 562; Wells v. Telegraph Co., 239 S.W. 1007; A......
-
Darling v. Buddy
...220 S.W. 1019; Weber Engine Co. v. Alter, 245 P. 143; Harris v. Oil Co., 204 P. 754; Thompson v. Schmitt, 274 S.W. 554; Victor Refining Co. v. Bank, 274 S.W. 561, 263 S.W. 622; McCamey v. Hollister Oil Co., 241 S.W. 699, 274 S.W. (Tex. Sup.) 562; Wells v. Telegraph Co., 239 S.W. 1007; Ameri......
-
Traveler's Insurance Company v. United States
...Hamilton, 62 Tex. 143, 151 (1884); Victor Ref. Co. v. City Nat'l Bank of Commerce, 263 S.W. 622, 624 (Tex.Civ.App.1924), aff'd, 115 Tex. 71, 274 S.W. 561 (1925). Thus, in a suit for contribution the alleged joint tortfeasor has the opportunity to raise the issue of common liability by claim......
-
Hemphill v. Orloff
...159 Ark. 621, 252 S. W. 602, 31 A. L. R. 847;Hamilton v. Young, 116 Kan. 128, 225 P. 1045, 35 A. L. R. 496;Victor Refining Co. v. City National Bank, 115 Tex. 71, 274 S. W. 561. These entities come to this state masquerading as ‘pure trusts,’ claiming the right as disclosed by their so-call......