Translate
Text Highlighter

Bookmark

PDF

Share

Report a problem
AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)
  • Samuel H. Peak, of Houston, for appellant. Moore Moore, of Paris, for appellee. The appellee Haynes brought this suit in Lamar County against Duncan Coffee Company to recover $435.05 alleged to have been earned as commissions for the sale of certain products of defendant under a written salesmanship contract executed on or about July 1, 1932. The defendant, a Texas corporation domiciled in Harris County, pleaded its privilege to be sued in said county. Controverting affidavit was filed by the plaintiff alleging the venue was properly laid in Lamar County because plaintiff's cause of action arose in whole or in part in Lamar County and the defendant is a corporation and had a representative in said county. The plea was overruled, and the defendant appeals. At the request of the defendant the Court filed its findings and conclusions, in which it was found that the defendant is a Texas corporation and had a representative and local agent in Lamar County. This finding is not challenged.
Judges
  • HIGGINS, Justice (after stating the case as above).
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Click here to upload
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)
  • Samuel H. Peak, of Houston, for appellant. Moore Moore, of Paris, for appellee. The appellee Haynes brought this suit in Lamar County against Duncan Coffee Company to recover $435.05 alleged to have been earned as commissions for the sale of certain products of defendant under a written salesmanship contract executed on or about July 1, 1932. The defendant, a Texas corporation domiciled in Harris County, pleaded its privilege to be sued in said county. Controverting affidavit was filed by the plaintiff alleging the venue was properly laid in Lamar County because plaintiff's cause of action arose in whole or in part in Lamar County and the defendant is a corporation and had a representative in said county. The plea was overruled, and the defendant appeals. At the request of the defendant the Court filed its findings and conclusions, in which it was found that the defendant is a Texas corporation and had a representative and local agent in Lamar County. This finding is not challenged.
Judges
  • HIGGINS, Justice (after stating the case as above).
See more information ...
Smart Summary

DUNCAN COFFEE CO. v. HAYNES.

HIGGINS, Justice (after stating the case as above).

The propositions submitted in the appellant's brief in substance are that plaintiff failed to establish a prima facie cause of action against the defendant and there is a fatal variance between the contract of employment pleaded and that proved. These propositions present no ground for reversal for it was shown, and the Court found, the defendant to be a Texas corporation with a representative or local agent in Lamar County. This finding fixed the venue as being properly laid in said county under Art. 1995, Sect. 23, R.S. Texas-Louisiana Power Co. v. Wells, 121 Tex. 397, 48 S.W.2d 978, 981; De Shong Motor Freight Lines v. North Texas Coach Co. (Tex.Civ.App.) 108 S.W.2d 766.

Affirmed.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.
Try AI Pro free for 7 days Upgrade to AI Pro

Comments

DUNCAN COFFEE CO. v. HAYNES
(Jun 8, 1939)