Morris v. Runnells
Texas Supreme Court
Error from Rusk. The appellee sued the appellant in Rusk ■County, that being the county of the defendant’s residence, for the rescission of an executed contract for the sale of six hundred and forty acres of land in Fannin county, on the ground that the sale was procured by fraud. The petition was indorsed with notice that the action was brought to try the title, &c.
Read the full summary
Error from Rusk. The appellee sued the appellant in Rusk ■County, that being the county of the defendant’s residence, for the rescission of an executed contract for the sale of six hundred and forty acres of land in Fannin county, on the ground that the sale was procured by fraud. The petition was indorsed with notice that the action was brought to try the title, &c. It seems that the action was brought under the 6th exception of Article 667. Eb objection to the jurisdiction was taken below. It was alleged that the defendant, by certain fraudulent representations, induced the plaintiff to…
1Opinion of the CourtWheeler, J.
It is insisted for the plaintiff in error, that the Court had not jurisdiction to try the case in the county of the residence of the defendant, because the land, the subject matter of the sale which it was proposed to rescind, was situated in a different county.
There was no objection taken to the jurisdiction of the Court, by plea or exception. And we have heretofore decided, that the right of the defendant to be sued in a particular county, being a question of local jurisdiction merely, is a personal privilege, which the defendant, if he think proper, may waive ; and which, by pleading to…
2Cited by16 opinions
- McCampbell v. DurstCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1897
- State v. WynnTexas Supreme Court · 1957
- State v. WynneTexas Supreme Court · 1957
- Lucas v. PattonCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1908
- Barton v. KaneWisconsin Supreme Court · 1863
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.