Westmoreland v. Miller
Texas Supreme Court
Error from Houston. Tins suit was brought by the defendant in error, for the use of Burris and wife, against the defendant, on a contract to pay l wo hundred dollars on or before the tirst day of .January, A. D. 1851, for rent. The plaintiff contracted in the lease of the land as agent for P. .J. Burris and Ids wife. E. S. Burris.
Read the full summary
Error from Houston. Tins suit was brought by the defendant in error, for the use of Burris and wife, against the defendant, on a contract to pay l wo hundred dollars on or before the tirst day of .January, A. D. 1851, for rent. The plaintiff contracted in the lease of the land as agent for P. .J. Burris and Ids wife. E. S. Burris. The defendant in the court below answered that lie admitted that ho owed the debt named in the petition and that he was ready and willing' to pay the same as the court might order, but said that on the 23th (lay of October, 1830, be was garnisheed at the instance of…
1Opinion of the CourtLipscomb, J.
Tlie plaintiff demurred to the answer of the defendant, and as grounds of demurrer stated many objections to the proceedings before the justice of tlie peace which we will not notice, because we believe that if available at all they can only bo urged after making tlie plaintiff in the garnishment a party. The court below, however, thought otherwise, and sustained the demurrer and gave judgment against the defendant. It is believed, although tlie judgment and proceedings of the justice of the peace may be obnoxious to the objections taken to them by the plaintiff in this suit, yet that the…
2Cited by10 opinions
- Lang v. DoughertyTexas Supreme Court · 1889
- Melton v. American Surety Co. of New YorkCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1922
- Van Slyck v. Dallas Bank & Trust Co.Court of Appeals of Texas · 1931
- Morris v. CoburnTexas Supreme Court · 1888
- North British & Mercantile Ins. Co. of London & Edinburg v. KlarasTexas Commission of Appeals · 1920
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.