Smith v. Tucker
Texas Supreme Court
Error from Harrison. Tried below before W. B. Ochiltree, Esq., as special judge, by agreement of counsel; the district judge being disqualified to sit in the case.
Read the full summary
Error from Harrison. Tried below before W. B. Ochiltree, Esq., as special judge, by agreement of counsel; the district judge being disqualified to sit in the case. Edward Smith instituted this suit against James Tucker in the ordinary form of an action of trespass to try title for twenty-six labors of land, surveyed by virtue of certificate- No. 387, issued by the board of land commissioners of Shelby county, to B. F, Hooper; the field notes of which were set out in the petition. The defendant pleaded the general issue, and set up title to two tracts embraced within that claimed by plaintiff,…
1Opinion of the CourtWheeler, C. J.
There is the same defect in the verdict in this case as in the case of Mays v. Lewis, 4 Tex. R., 38.
It does not find the facts essential to support the judgment, but refei’s the court to the evidence given upon the trial to render certain the finding of the jury. In Mays v. Lewis it was held that no judgment could be rendered upon a verdict which found for the plaintiff “ the full amount specified in the promissory 3iotes adduced in the case,” because the verdict referred to the evidence to ascertain the amount found by the jury, and could not be rendered certain by reference to the…
2Cited by21 opinions
- Lockett v. SchurenbergTexas Supreme Court · 1884
- Texas & Pacific R'y Co. v. McAllisterTexas Supreme Court · 1883
- Northern Texas Traction Co. v. Armour & Co.Texas Supreme Court · 1926
- Southern Pine Lumber Co. v. WhitemanCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1937
- Houston Packing Co. v. GriffithCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1914
16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.