From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Smith Perry Elec. Co. v. Standard Acc. Ins. Co.

Supreme Court of Texas
Feb 12, 1964
376 S.W.2d 335 (Tex. 1964)

Opinion

No. A-9941.

February 12, 1964.

Appeal from the 101th Judicial District Court, Dallas County, Dallas A. Blankenship, J.

Matthews Matthews, Dallas, for petitioner.

Turner, Rodgers, Winn, Scurlock Terry and James W. Leftwich, Dallas, for respondents.


The opinion of the Court of Civil Appeals is reported in 373 S.W.2d 97.

The action of the trial court in granting summary judgment in favor of the respondent, Smith Perry Electric Company, was reversed and the cause remanded by the Court of Civil Appeals on the ground that a fact issue was raised as to whether or not the promissory note given by Southwest Electric Company to Smith Perry Electric Company was accepted by the latter in full payment of the materials sold and delivered to Southwest Electric Company.

The Court of Civil Appeals also overruled Smith Perry Electric Company's cross point that the trial court erred in sustaining the special exception to its pleadings for attorneys' fees. Our action in refusing this application no reversible error is not to be taken as approving or disapproving the latter ruling.

Application refused n. r. e.


Summaries of

Smith Perry Elec. Co. v. Standard Acc. Ins. Co.

Supreme Court of Texas
Feb 12, 1964
376 S.W.2d 335 (Tex. 1964)
Case details for

Smith Perry Elec. Co. v. Standard Acc. Ins. Co.

Case Details

Full title:SMITH PERRY ELECTRIC COMPANY, Petitioner, v. STANDARD ACCIDENT INSURANCE…

Court:Supreme Court of Texas

Date published: Feb 12, 1964

Citations

376 S.W.2d 335 (Tex. 1964)

Citing Cases

Transamerica Ins. Co. v. Red Top Metal, Inc.

Accordingly, we hold that under federal law the materialman in the present case has no greater protection.…

New Amsterdam Casualty Co. v. Texas Industries

The material was furnished not to the surety but to the contractor-principal. Cf. F. C. Engineering Co. v.…