Case Name: CHENEY et al. v. COFFEY et al.
Court: Texas Commission of Appeals
Jurisdiction: Texas
Decision Date: 1938-03-23
Citations: 114 S.W.2d 533
Docket Number: Motion No. 13378; No. 1701-6955
Parties: CHENEY et al. v. COFFEY et al.
Judges: 
Reporter: South Western Reporter Second Series
Volume: 114
Pages: 533–534

Head Matter:
CHENEY et al. v. COFFEY et al.
Motion No. 13378; No. 1701-6955.
Commission of Appeals of Texas, Section B.
March 23, 1938.
H. S. Garrett, of Fort Worth, for plaintiffs in error.
Cantey, Hanger & McMahon and Gillis A. Johnson, all of Fort Worth, for defendants in error.

Opinion:
MARTIN, Commissioner.
In making general quotations, as in our original opinion, we do not commit the court upon questions not presented in the record before us. Obviously, this court in the present case has not before it the naked question of the validity of an oral contract to adopt, and does not decide that question.
We decline to be led into a further discussion of the contract pleaded and relied on for recovery in this case. The question is sufficiently discussed and point edly decided in Hooks v. Bridgewater, 111 Tex. 122, 229 S.W. 1114, IS A.L.R. 216, and unless we are prepared to overrule that case, a discussion would be useless.
Motion overruled.
Opinion adopted by the Supreme Court.