Cato v. Philips
Texas Supreme Court
Appeal from Hill. The case was tried before Hon. John Gregg, one of the district judges. On the 28th of March, 1858, W. J. Philips, the appellee, instituted this suit against Cato, the appellant, on a promissory note for $600 91, executed by Cato, and payable to George Hooker or bearer.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Hill. The case was tried before Hon. John Gregg, one of the district judges. On the 28th of March, 1858, W. J. Philips, the appellee, instituted this suit against Cato, the appellant, on a promissory note for $600 91, executed by Cato, and payable to George Hooker or bearer. The defendant answered, that the note sued on was given to secure the payment of the purchase-money, in part, of a tract of land bought by the defendant from said Hooker, for title to which he held Hooker’s bond; that one Headrick proposed to defendant to exchange a house and lot in the town of Waco for said…
1Opinion of the CourtDonley, J.
—It was relied upon as a defense to this action, that appellee had wrongfully sold land belonging to appellant for the sum of $3,600, which amount the appellee had received, and appellant asks that it he allowed him in set-off.
It was competent for appellant to waive any right of action that may have accrued to him on account of the illegal sale of his property, and recover from appellee the money which he had received for the land. The count for money had and received is sustainable in some cases where the money has been received tortiously. (1 Chit. on Plead., 353.)
In this case, the…
2Cited by6 opinions
- New York and Texas Land Co. v. HylandCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1894
- Renick & Frazier v. DawsonTexas Supreme Court · 1881
- Riddle v. McKinneyTexas Supreme Court · 1886
- Stott v. ScottTexas Supreme Court · 1887
- Kubat v. ZikaSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1932
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.