Flournoy v. Healy
Texas Supreme Court
Error from Jackson. The case was tried before Hon. J. J. Holt, one of the district judges. The note was dated 12th December, 1865, was due at ninety days, for “590 in specie” “or 894 in United States currency.” The verdict was for $590 in specie, with interest, and the judgment followed the verdict. There was a sort of plea of duress; but there was neither charge, bill of exceptions, nor statement of facts in the record.
Read the full summary
Error from Jackson. The case was tried before Hon. J. J. Holt, one of the district judges. The note was dated 12th December, 1865, was due at ninety days, for “590 in specie” “or 894 in United States currency.” The verdict was for $590 in specie, with interest, and the judgment followed the verdict. There was a sort of plea of duress; but there was neither charge, bill of exceptions, nor statement of facts in the record. The only error relied on was the “specie” or coin decree. The case has the interesting feature, that after execution was levied, one “ Tim H. Leeds, quartermaster United…
1Opinion of the Court
Morrill, O. J.
—The onk" Qrror assigned in this case is, that the district court er . rendering a judgment for a ■ certain number of dollars m specie, in violation of the legal-tender act of the United States.
This court, at the Austin branch, in 1867, [Shaw v. Trunsler, 30 Tex., 391,] decided the legal tender act constitutional, and hence any judgment having a tendency to impair, impeach, or set aside the validity of this act would be, pro tanto, erroneous. Though the defendant in the execution could satisfy it, and would be fully released on the payment of the number of dollars called for…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Windisch v. GussettTexas Supreme Court · 1868
3Cited by2 opinions
- Davidson v. PeticolasTexas Supreme Court · 1871
- Bridges v. ReynoldsTexas Supreme Court · 1874