TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

Batson-Milholme Co. v. Faulk

Batson-Milholme Company v. C.E. Faulk.

Batson-Milholme Co. v. Faulk, 211 S.W. 972 (Tex. 1919)
Download
Format
Include

Star paging (*137) is kept for pin cites.

Court
Texas Supreme Court · State Highest Courts
Decided
May 14, 1919
Docket
No. Application No. 11154. Motion No. 4510.
Judges
Phillips
Citations
211 S.W. 972109 Tex. 4801919 Tex. LEXIS 84
Headnotes
Proper Respect for Courts. The Supreme Court condemns a motion filed in this case as lacking in respect to the courts of the State; and for that reason refuse to consider same and order it stricken from the files. (P. 481.)
Summary
Motion for rehearing of an application for writ of error which had been refused. The action was brought by Faulk .against Batson-Milkolme Company, for personal injuries. Judgment went for plaintiff and defendant company appealed. On affirmance (209 S. W., 837) the company applied for a writ of error, and on its refusal filed a motion for rehearing thereon in terms criticized in the opinion following.

Syllabus and headnotes are prepared by the reporter or publisher, not the court, and are not part of the opinion.

Opinion of the Court — Phillips

Mr. Chief Justice PHILLIPS delivered the order of the court.

There is matter contained in the motion for rehearing filed for the plaintiff in error directed to our action in refusing a writ of error which we do not think has any proper place in a document addressed to this court. It is said in effect that the question involved has only been carelessly considered by this court and the several Courts of Civil Appeals which have passed upon it. The contrary is true with respect to this court’s action, and we believe it to be equally true in respect to the action of the Courts of Civil Appeals. It is furthermore plainly intimated that this court’s denial of the writ of error was due to an obstinate refusal to be governed by what the counsel for plaintiff in error advanced as controlling authorities on the question. The spirit of the motion as revealed by its language is captious and sarcastic. Only a broad charity would prevent its being characterized as intentionally disrespectful. The question involved in the case received at our hands a painstaking investigation. We regarded it as correctly determined by the Court of Civil Appeals, whatever conflict may be found in the reasoning of the different Courts of Civil Appeals upon it. We are willing to accord the utmost liberty to -counsel in the presentation of cases here. But the court owes it to itself not to 'consider motion couched in such terms as this one is and it will not consider the motion. Such a document can serve no office in this court and has no place here. It is ordered that it be stricken from the files.

How later courts describe this case

No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.

1922: 21923: 11924: 11926: 11974: 119222026peak 1922 · 2

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. George W. Armstrong Co. v. Adair247 S.W. 848 (Tex. 1923)
  2. Millers' Indemnity Underwriters v. Lane241 S.W. 1085 (Tex. App. 1922)
  3. Producers' Oil Co. v. Daniels259 S.W. 936 (Tex. Comm'n App. 1924)
  4. Shore v. Carl284 S.W. 289 (Tex. App. 1926)
  5. Steere v. State Bar of Texas510 S.W.2d 411 (Tex. App. 1974)
  6. Producers Oil Co. v. Daniels244 S.W. 117 (Tex. 1922)

Most recent

  1. Steere v. State Bar of Texas510 S.W.2d 411 (Tex. App. 1974)
  2. Shore v. Carl284 S.W. 289 (Tex. App. 1926)
  3. Producers' Oil Co. v. Daniels259 S.W. 936 (Tex. Comm'n App. 1924)
  4. George W. Armstrong Co. v. Adair247 S.W. 848 (Tex. 1923)
  5. Producers Oil Co. v. Daniels244 S.W. 117 (Tex. 1922)
  6. Millers' Indemnity Underwriters v. Lane241 S.W. 1085 (Tex. App. 1922)

Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.

Authorities cited 0

No citations to other opinions in this database were found.

Keyboard shortcuts

/Focus the search box
j kNext / previous result
EnterOpen the selected result
xAdd / remove the selected result from the download list
n pNext / previous search term in a case
cCopy the citation of the current case
+ −Larger / smaller reading text
?Show this list