Hollis v. Francois
Texas Supreme Court
Appeal from Sail Angustine. The petition stated that Elizabeth L. Hollis,, the wife of William Hoilis, was on the first day of November, 1845, ostensibly the owner of a number of negro slaves in the possession of the said William, which slaves were held by John G. Love, as trustee for tho, said Elizabeth, hut were in truth and fact, as the petitioners believed, the bona fide property of tho said William.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Sail Angustine. The petition stated that Elizabeth L. Hollis,, the wife of William Hoilis, was on the first day of November, 1845, ostensibly the owner of a number of negro slaves in the possession of the said William, which slaves were held by John G. Love, as trustee for tho, said Elizabeth, hut were in truth and fact, as the petitioners believed, the bona fide property of tho said William. That during the year 1845 the said William and Elizabeth purchased of the petitioners 'a wagon, three mules, farming utensils, provisions, and other necessaries for the family of the said…
1Opinion of the Court
Hemphill, Ch. J.
The grounds upon which the appellants rely to show that the judgment is erroneous are—
1st. That the contract of the wife, as a joint promissor with her husband, created no legal liability on her part, and was, as to her, absolutely null and void.
2d. That the mortgage was but an accessorial contract, dependent upon the legal liability created by her signing the said note ; and that it was null and void, and could not be enforced against her separate property.
The first proposition, if tested by the rules of the common law, or at least those administered in the common-law courts,…
2Cited by18 opinions
- Ballard v. CarmichaelTexas Supreme Court · 1892
- Cruger v. McCrackenTexas Supreme Court · 1895
- Magee v. WhiteTexas Supreme Court · 1859
- Jones v. CrosthwaiteSupreme Court of Iowa · 1864
- Wofford v. UngerTexas Supreme Court · 1881
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.