Travelers Ins. Co. v. Jerry D. MacHann, 190 F.2d 84 (5th Cir. 1951). · Go Syfert
Search
Travelers Ins. Co. v. Jerry D. MacHann, 190 F.2d 84 (5th Cir. 1951). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
30 citation events across 5 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: Fender Sales, Inc. v. Commissioner
Treatment trajectory · 1951 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1951 1988 2026
Top citers, strongest first. 2 distinct citers. How cited ↗
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Fender Sales, Inc. v. Commissioner
unknown court · 1963 · confidence medium
Challenge Manufacturing Co., 37 T.C. 650 , 660 (1962) ; Limericks, Inc., 7 T.C. 1129 (1946) , affd. 165 F. 2d 483 (C.A. 5, 1948); Stanwicks, Inc., 15 T.C. 556 (1950) , affd. per curiam 190 F. 2d 84 *271 (C.A. 4, 1951).
discussed Cited "see" Fountain Valley Community Hospital, Inc. v. Commissioner
Tax Ct. · 1987 · signal: see · confidence high
See Stanwicks, Inc. v. Commissioner, 15 T.C. 556 (1950) , affd. per curiam 190 F. 2d 84 (4th Cir. 1951) ; Consolidated Apparel Co. v. Commissioner, 17 T.C. 1570 (1952) , revd. in part 207 F. 2d 580 (7th Cir. 1953) ; and Ray's Clothes, Inc. v. Commissioner, 22 T.C. 1332 , 1340 (1954) , where we held that if a corporation holding a leasehold interest under a lease with a related party accepts, without consideration, a new and less advantageous *192 lease, the corporation is not entitled to deduct as rent the excess of the payments required under the new lease over the payments required under the…
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
TRAVELERS INS. CO., Appellant
v.
Jerry D. MACHANN, Appellee
13206.
Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit.
Jun 28, 1951.
190 F.2d 84
Thos. M. Phillips, Houston, Tex., for appellant., S. G. Kolius, and Harry H. Burns, Houston, Tex., for appellee.
Holmes, McCORD, Per Curiam, Russell.
Published
Reporter's Syllabus — editorial summary, not part of the Court's opinion

Thos. M. Phillips, Houston, Tex., for appellant.

S. G. Kolius, and Harry H. Burns, Houston, Tex., for appellee.

Before HOLMES, McCORD and RUSSELL, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM.

Lead Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Upon consideration thereof, it is ordered that the Petition for Rehearing in the above styled and numbered cause be, and the same hereby is

Denied.

Dissent

RUSSELL, Circuit Judge

(dissenting).

I must dissent from the judgment denying the Motion for Rehearing. Upon the original . consideration of this case, I thought that since the statute, quoted in the opinion, only required that the interested party should within twenty days “bring suit in the county where the injury occurred”, and this suit was so brought, even if in an improper Court, that there had been sufficient compliance with the intent of the statute. However, upon further consideration of the question upon motion for rehearing, this does not appear a proper construction of the Texas law and overlooked the ruling in Price v. Continental Casualty Co., Tex. Civ.App., 229 S.W.2d 887, to the effect that the filing of the petition in a Court without jurisdiction was not “the commencement and prosecution of a suit” within the terms of the statute and does not have the effect of interrupting the limitation thereby provided. I am left, therefore, with no proper basis for my judgment, except the[*85] Texas law, which, in such cases, enforces a strict jurisdictional requirement and treats the timely filing of a suit as a statute of limitation, “compliance with which is mandatory and jurisdictional.” 45 Tex.Jur. 759; Mingus v. Wadley, 115 Tex. 551, 285 S.W. 1084; Great American Indemnity Co. v. Dominguez, 5 Cir., 84 F.2d 179. I, therefore, conclude that we should grant the motion for rehearing, withdraw the former opinion, and reverse the judgment of the trial Court.