Court Opinion

ID: 9833080
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-09-01 22:26:10.677765+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:43:59.478408
License: Public Domain

On Motion for Rehearing.
 We have concluded that we were in error in holding, in our original opinion, that it was not necessary for defendant in error Texas Bitulithic Company to prove that it had a permit to do business in Texas. While it is true that, unless the petition shows that the corporation is doing business in Texas, the fact must be specially pleaded to place upon such corporation the burden of proof as to a permit, yet it is equally true, according to the recent holding of our Commission of Appeals, in Smith et al. v. Jasper County Lumber Co., 76 S.W. (2d) 505, that, .where the petition shows that the corporation has an office in the state, it likewise has the burden of showing the issuance of a permit. The petition in the present case showing the existence of an office, in Texas, the burden was on the Bitulithic Company to prove that it had been granted a permit to do business in Texas. The record showing that, when the question of the authority to maintain' the suit was raised in the trikl court, defendants in error’s attorney Requested a 'continuance in'cáse the coiirt'held the proof necessary, we shall reverse and remand the case rather than dismiss the suit, as would probably be our duty if defendants in error had had an opportunity to prove up their permit.
Our judgment heretofore rendered is accordingly withdrawn, and the judgment of the trial court reversed and the cause remanded.