Hampton v. Dean
Texas Supreme Court
Appeal from Upsher. The appellant brought suit against the appellees upon, a promissory note set out in the petition as follows : “MONTGOMERY, January 20, 1844. “ $100.10 On or before the first day of January next we or either of ns promise to pay Franklin Armstrong or bearer oue hundred dollars and ten cents for' value received. Jarrot Dean.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Upsher. The appellant brought suit against the appellees upon, a promissory note set out in the petition as follows : “MONTGOMERY, January 20, 1844. “ $100.10 On or before the first day of January next we or either of ns promise to pay Franklin Armstrong or bearer oue hundred dollars and ten cents for' value received. Jarrot Dean. I A. Moseley.” \ The answer embraced a plea of a former judgment rendered by a] justice of the peace upon the same cause of action between one B. F. Giuuis, 1 the then owner and holder of the note now sued on, as plaintiff, and those de- ’ fendants. To…
1Opinion of the CourtWheeler, J.
Of tlie several errors assigned, those which it is deemed material to notice are—
1st. The submission to tlie jury of tlie issue upon tlie plea of a former judgment, and tlie admission of parol evidence to identify the judgment and the note upon which it was rendered;
2d. Permit ling the credit upon the note to be read to the jury; and,
3d. Tlie refusal of instructions asked by the plaintiff.
Tlie first objection here presented is answered by the opinion of this court in the cases of Foster v. Wells and Weathered v. Mays, decided at tlie present term.
Although tlie credit upon tlie note had not…
2Cited by6 opinions
- Muckleroy v. BethanyTexas Supreme Court · 1859
- MacEdonia Baptist Church v. Farm & Home Savings & Loan Ass'nCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1937
- Mann v. MitchellCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1922
- MacEdonia Baptist Church v. Farm & Home Savings & Loan Ass'nCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1937
- Mann v. MitchellCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1922
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.