Williams v. Edwards
Texas Supreme Court
Appeal from Fayette. Suit by the appellee against the appellant, on the following instrument, a copy of which was given in the petition: On or before the first day of January next, I promise to James A. Edwards the sum of $1000 (one thousand dollars) for value received of him, with ten per cent, interest from date, this May 16, 1854. ED. A. WILLIAMS.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Fayette. Suit by the appellee against the appellant, on the following instrument, a copy of which was given in the petition: On or before the first day of January next, I promise to James A. Edwards the sum of $1000 (one thousand dollars) for value received of him, with ten per cent, interest from date, this May 16, 1854. ED. A. WILLIAMS. It was denominated a promissory note, in the petition, and the consideration was not stated, except that it was executed and delivered for a valuable consideration. There was a demurrer ; general denial; and special plea to the effect that the…
1Opinion of the Court
Hemphill, Ch. J.
There was no error in overruling the demurrer to the petition.
Whether the instrument sued on be a promissory note or not is immaterial. It was set forth in terms in the petition, (4 *43Tex. R. 228; 11 Id. 415,) and if not a promissory note, it was, in substance, an unconditional agreement, for an acknowledged consideration, to pay, at a fixed time, the sum of money therein specified.
The promise by the defendant to the plaintiff, of the sum stated in the instrument, is equivalent to a promise to pay the amount. This is the only reasonable meaning and intent of the terms; and…
2Cited by1 opinion
- Williams v. TalbotTexas Supreme Court · 1863