Overton v. Blum
Texas Supreme Court
Appeal from Busk. Tried below before the Hon. A. J. Booty. Prior to May 18, 1874, the appellant and W. B. Henderson, partners in merchandise, were indebted to several merchants at Galveston.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Busk. Tried below before the Hon. A. J. Booty. Prior to May 18, 1874, the appellant and W. B. Henderson, partners in merchandise, were indebted to several merchants at Galveston. On that day these merchants made and signed between themselves and Overton & Henderson the following agreement: “We, the undersigned, creditors of Overton & Henderson,Overton-, Texas, do hereby agree, each and all of us, to relinquish all claims against said firm, upon payment to us, within fifteen days from this date, of fifty per centum of the amount set opposite to our names. This agreement is not…
1Opinion of the Court
Moore, Chief Justice.
Although the contrary might be inferred from some of the earlier decisions, (8 Tex., 342; 9 Tex., 69; 17 Tex., 114,) it must now be regarded as settled that a new trial is never in fact granted after the adjournment of the term of the court at which the judgment is rendered, no matter what are the grounds urged in support of the application. (Taylor, Knapp & Co. v. Fore, 42 Tex., 256; Roller v. Woolridge, 46 Tex., 485.) But though a new trial is never granted in terms after the adjournment of the court rendering the judgment, and there can be no such thing as another…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Roller v. WooldridgeTexas Supreme Court · 1877
- Taylor, Knapp & Co. v. ForeTexas Supreme Court · 1874
- San Antonio v. LewisTexas Supreme Court · 1852
3Cited by77 opinions
- Baker v. GoldsmithTexas Supreme Court · 1979
- Petro-Chemical Transport, Inc. v. CarrollTexas Supreme Court · 1974
- Winters Mut. Aid Ass'n Circle No. 2 v. ReddinTexas Commission of Appeals · 1932
- Humprey v. HarrellTexas Commission of Appeals · 1930
- Harn v. PhelpsTexas Supreme Court · 1886
72 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.