Legal Opinion

Kinnard v. Herlock

Texas Supreme Court

Decided July 1, 1857PublishedCited by 11 opinions

Error from. Dallas. Tried below before the Hon. Nat. M. Burford.

1Opinion of the Court

Hemphill, Ch. J.

Suit on promissory note. Plea, among others, of general denial. On exception, this was stricken out, and the defendant saying nothing further in bar of plaintiff’s demand, it was ordered that the plaintiff have judgment.

This proceeding is properly assigned as error. It has been more than once decided, that though the general denial did not put plaintiff upon proof of the execution of his note, it required its production; and that if pleaded, it precluded the plaintiff from taking judgment by default for want of an answer. (Able v. Chandler, 12 Tex. R. 88; Matossy v. Frosh, 9…

2Cited by11 opinions

  1. FRYMIRE ENGINEERING COMPANY INC. v. GranthamTexas Supreme Court · 1975
  2. Alexander v. Houston Oil Field Material Co.Court of Appeals of Texas · 1965
  3. Corsicana Ready Mix v. Trinity Metroplex Division, General, Portland, Inc.Court of Appeals of Texas · 1977
  4. Davis v. MarshallTexas Supreme Court · 1860
  5. Robinson v. Monning Dry Goods Co.Court of Appeals of Texas · 1919

6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API