Sydnor v. Hurd
Texas Supreme Court
Appeal from Galveston. Tins suit was brought on a promissory note, of which the following- is a copy : “ $206'.CS. Galveston, November 30, 1849. “Due Sydnor & Bone, or order, by schooner Cornelius and owners, for supplies and materials received, the sum of two hundred and six dollars and sixty-eight cents, payable at Galveston ten days after date. William L. Hurd.”
Read the full summary
Appeal from Galveston. Tins suit was brought on a promissory note, of which the following- is a copy : “ $206'.CS. Galveston, November 30, 1849. “Due Sydnor & Bone, or order, by schooner Cornelius and owners, for supplies and materials received, the sum of two hundred and six dollars and sixty-eight cents, payable at Galveston ten days after date. William L. Hurd.” The petition alleged that on the 30th day of £Tovember, 1840, the plaintiffs were merchants and partners, carrying on business in the city of Galveston under the firm name of Sydnor & Bone; that the defendant resided in the county…
1Opinion of the CourtWheeleR, J.
The question presented by the assign meat of errors is, whether tile note introduced in evidence afforded sufficient prima facie evidence of the personal liability of the defendant to have authorized a verdict for the plaintiffs.
It appears from tho consideration expressed in the note that it was given for supplies and materials furnished the vessel. The terms in which it is expressed imply that the goods were contracted for and received by the defendant for the use of tho vessel. It is not, perhaps, to be inferred that the defendant was owner; but from the nature of the contract and the form…
2Cited by8 opinions
- Sims v. CallihanCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1931
- Diacomis v. WrightCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1929
- Bridges v. BidwellNebraska Supreme Court · 1886
- Turner & Co. v. Graham Gin Co.Court of Appeals of Texas · 1934
- Camp v. Dallas Nat. BankCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1929
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.