James v. Hood
New Mexico Supreme Court
Appeal from District Court, Union County, Thomas D„ Leib, Presiding Judge. Evidence in Eecord. 14 N M. 432, 117. Question for Jury. 1 A. & E. Ene. L., 2nd Ed., 1195; 8 Stand. Proc. 704. Objection and Exception of Appellant Do Not Avail. 2 N. M. Eep., p. 448; 8 Ene. P. & P. 262, 263; 21 Enc. P. & P., pp. 1007, 1018; 31 Cyc. 1452; 101 N. W. 950; 23 Am. Eep. 184.
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION.
ROBERTS, C. J.
Appellant instituted this action to recover from appellee an alleged balance of $1,800, interest and attorneys’ fees claimed to be due on a promissory note, executed and delivered to him by appellee. Appellee filed an answer, setting up a lack of consideration .as to $1,375.43 of tlie indebtedness represented by the note, and also set up a counter claim against the appellant for approximately $16,000, made up of various items. 'One of these items, amounting to $1,172.97, was based upon a claim that appellant had delivered to appellee 6,400 head of'sheep on a “partido”…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Kansas Pacific Railway Co. v. KunkelSupreme Court of Kansas · 1876
- Block v. DarlingSupreme Court of the United States · 1891
- Walsh v. . KellyNew York Court of Appeals · 1869
- Scoville v. Salt Lake CityUtah Supreme Court · 1895
- Kennedy v. FaldeSupreme Court Of The Territory Of Dakota · 1886
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by21 opinions
- Fullen v. FullenNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1915
- State v. CarabajalNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1920
- State v. StarrNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1917
- Childers v. Southern Pacific Co.New Mexico Supreme Court · 1915
- Bunton v. HullNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1947
16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.