Parr v. Johnston
Texas Supreme Court
Appeal from Gonzales. Suit by appellee against appellant on a promissory note alleged to have been made by the defendant's intestate, Richard Parr, and to have been lost by the plaintiff. Answer that -i the lost note sued on or set up in ‘ plaintiff's petition, was not the deed or act of the deceased “ Richard Parr.” Interrogatories annexed to defendant’s answer, 1st. Was not the note set up in your petition and alleged to be lost a forgery ? 2d.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Gonzales. Suit by appellee against appellant on a promissory note alleged to have been made by the defendant's intestate, Richard Parr, and to have been lost by the plaintiff. Answer that -i the lost note sued on or set up in ‘ plaintiff's petition, was not the deed or act of the deceased “ Richard Parr.” Interrogatories annexed to defendant’s answer, 1st. Was not the note set up in your petition and alleged to be lost a forgery ? 2d. If you say it was not, state what was the consideration of said note, and where was the same given ? 3d. If you answer that the consideration was…
1Opinion of the Court
Hemphill, Ch. J.
This was a suit against an administrator, on a lost note. The defendant pleaded that the note sued on was not the deed or act of the deceased, and made oath that the plea was true to the best of his knowledge and belief. He also filed several interrogatories to be propounded to the plaintiff in the cause. From the statement of facts it appears that both the plea and interrogatories were stricken out, on the motion of the plaintiff, and this action of the Court is assigned as error.
But preliminary to an examination of this assignment it will be necessary to recur to a point…
2Cited by2 opinions
- Barnett v. Logue's AdministratorsTexas Supreme Court · 1867
- Thaxton v. WhitesidesCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1932