Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

210 S.W. 283

Austin v. Huffman

Court of Appeals of Texas

Decided February 28, 1919

Court of Appeals of Texas · decided 1919-02-28

Suit by Charles O. Austin, Commissioner of Insurance and Banking against T. E. Huffman and J. N. Campbell. From that part of the judgment denying recovery against defendant last named, plaintiff appeals. Reversed and rendered.

Relies on Austin v. Campbell

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1919-02-28

How this case has been cited

Cited by 9 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently November 1931

8 state decisions

40191919201930decided

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

HODGES, J.

¶1Chas. O. Austin, as commissioner of insurance and banking, filed this suit in the district court of Gregg county on June 29, 1917, against T. E. Huffman, a stockholder in the People’s State Bank of Longview, and J. N. Campbell, a former stockholder, seeking to recover the sum of $1,000, the face value of stock then owned by Huffman. The record shows that Campbell, the former owner, transferred the stock to Huffman on February 5, 1916; and on the 18th day of August, 1916, the commissioner of insurance and banking took charge of the affairs of the bank as provided for in the statute. In the court below judgment was rendered in favor of the commissioner for the full amount sued for against Huffman, but the court refused a judgment against Campbell; and this appeal is from that portion of the judgment.

¶2The case was tried before the court without a jury, and he filed findings of fact and conclusions of law which are the same as those filed in the case of Austin v. T. D. Campbell et al., 210 S. W. 277, this day decided by this court.

¶3For the reasons stated in that case, the judgment of the trial court will be reversed, and judgment here rendei’ed in favor of the commissioner against J. N. Campbell, together with interest and costs.

¶4On Motion for Rehearing.

¶5The motion for a rehearing in this case is overruled, for the reasons stated in the companion case of Austin v. Campbell et al., 210 S. W. 277, this day decided by this court. '

/210/sw/283 · .json · Public domain