Douglass, Brown & Co. v. Neil & Co.
Texas Supreme Court
Appeal from Anderson. Tried below before the Hon. John G. Scott. Appellees were plaintiffs in the court below. P. McDannell, M. McCarty, and James Neil constituted their firm of James Neil & Co. McDannell made the affidavit, and instituted the attachment proceedings by which the suit was commenced against Quinn, Murphy & Neil, the defendants.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Anderson. Tried below before the Hon. John G. Scott. Appellees were plaintiffs in the court below. P. McDannell, M. McCarty, and James Neil constituted their firm of James Neil & Co. McDannell made the affidavit, and instituted the attachment proceedings by which the suit was commenced against Quinn, Murphy & Neil, the defendants. Nothing in the pleadings of the plaintiffs or the defendants showed that the defendant Neil was the same person as one of the plaintiffs ; but this fact 'was alleged by the appellants, who had been cited as garnishees, and who, after judgment in favor of…
1Opinion of the CourtWalker, J.
The appellants were garnished in an action by James Neil & Co., against Quinn, Murphy & Neil. The plaintiffs below sued out an attachment, and Y. M. Blanding was also served with a writ of garnishment. The record is silent as to what became of the writ served on Blanding, and it will not be material to notice him further in this opinion. J. J. Brown, one of the firm, answered for his firm, which answer was controverted by the appellees.
At the Fall Term, 1872, the appellees recovered judgment for upwards of fourteen thousand dollars against Quinn, Murphy & Neil. At a subsequent day of the…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Williams v. TalbotTexas Supreme Court · 1863
- Fowler v. BucknerTexas Supreme Court · 1859
- English v. HelmsTexas Supreme Court · 1849
- Son v. William G. Lane & Co.Texas Supreme Court · 1860
3Cited by2 opinions
- Wasson v. HarrisCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1918
- National Surety Co. v. McFarlandCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1922