Krightley v. Seydell
Texas Supreme Court
Appeal from Dallas County. STATEMENT. This suit was brought (Deo. 29th, 1873) by appellant as administrator of Adelaid Krightley, deceased, against appellees, J. C. Seydell, N. R. Winniford, Wm. Fleming, S. C. Atterbory and Wm. H. Freedman upon a promisoiy note. The note is alleged to have been executed and delivered to plaintiffs intestate by the defendants and one Wm.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Dallas County. STATEMENT. This suit was brought (Deo. 29th, 1873) by appellant as administrator of Adelaid Krightley, deceased, against appellees, J. C. Seydell, N. R. Winniford, Wm. Fleming, S. C. Atterbory and Wm. H. Freedman upon a promisoiy note. The note is alleged to have been executed and delivered to plaintiffs intestate by the defendants and one Wm. Krightley (since deceased) and is set out in the petition as follows to wit : $1000 00. Lancaster, Texas, Jan. 1st, 1871. One year after date we, or either of ”us, promise to pay to Adelaid Keightley the sum of one thousand…
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Delany W. S.
In considering this case we omit all that relates’to the interrogatories propounded by the plaintiff, except to say that they were not pertinent to the issue.
The defendents were not asked if they had executed the note in suit, but if they had signed any note.
Of course no judgement could have been rendered against them upon tiieir failure to answer. But the judgement actually rendered is assigned as error; and the question is, can that judgement be maintained ? Counsel for appellees puts the case thus : The plain-
tiff declares upon a note signed by six. He proved a note…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Austin v. JordanTexas Supreme Court · 1849
- P. J. Willis & Bro. v. MorrisonTexas Supreme Court · 1875
- Horton v. WheelerTexas Supreme Court · 1856
- Congdon & Aylsworth v. H. W. Monroe & Co.Texas Supreme Court · 1879