Wornell v. Williams
Texas Supreme Court
Error from Rusk. Tried below before the Hon. William W. Morris. Suit by appellee against appellants, on a joint and several ■promissory note, signed by defendants and one J. E. Glascock, who was alleged to have since died. ' Defendants demurred, denied all and singular, and pleaded specially as follows : That the note sued on and set out in said petition, was made and given by one James E. Glascock, as principal, and these defendants, as sureties for said- Glascock : that…
Read the full summary
Error from Rusk. Tried below before the Hon. William W. Morris. Suit by appellee against appellants, on a joint and several ■promissory note, signed by defendants and one J. E. Glascock, who was alleged to have since died. ' Defendants demurred, denied all and singular, and pleaded specially as follows : That the note sued on and set out in said petition, was made and given by one James E. Glascock, as principal, and these defendants, as sureties for said- Glascock : that the consideration of said note, as is expressed therein, was a negro slave, named Samuel, belonging to the estate of…
1Opinion of the CourtWheeler, J.
The question is, whether there was error in the ruling of the Court sustaining exceptions to the plea, and. excluding evidence in support of it; and we are of opinion there was not. The substantive matter of the plea is, that the defendants became sureties for the purchaser of the property, in the expectation and confidence that the administrator would perform his duty to the estate he represented, in *183taking the mortgage security required by law and the order of the Probate Court. There is no allegation that they were deceived, or induced to become sureties, by any false promises or…
2Cited by4 opinions
- McCampbell v. DurstCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1897
- Henry S. Sypert v. McCowen’s Executors Et Al.Texas Supreme Court · 1866
- Joyce v. AutenSupreme Court of the United States · 1900
- Joyce v. CockrillCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1899