Milburn v. Walker
Texas Supreme Court
Error from Wharton. There was no indorsement on the transcript, that it was demanded by or delivered to either party ; and for that cause the defendants in error moved to dismiss. The motion was overruled, without opinion in writing. The plaintiffs, B. & W. Milburn, (suing for B. & D. G. Mills,) represent, that the defendants, Wm.
Read the full summary
Error from Wharton. There was no indorsement on the transcript, that it was demanded by or delivered to either party ; and for that cause the defendants in error moved to dismiss. The motion was overruled, without opinion in writing. The plaintiffs, B. & W. Milburn, (suing for B. & D. G. Mills,) represent, that the defendants, Wm. L. Walker and Elizabeth, his wife, are indebted to them in the sum of three hundred and four dollars and forty-five cents, with interest thereon, at the rate of ten per cent, per annum, from the first day of January, 1852, for goods, wares and merchandize, furnished…
1Opinion of the Court
Hemphill, Ch. J.
The difficulty, under the first assignment, is, to determine whether the action is brought solely upon the open account, or whether the note of the husband is not also relied on, as fixing his liability and also that of the wife, the consideration for the note being necessaries for the wife, her children and her negroes. The Court below was of opinion that the action was brought upon the open account alone; and consequently the demurrer, setting up specially the statute of limitation of two years, and barring, as it did, the largest portion of the account, was sustained. The…
2Cited by18 opinions
- Missouri Pacific Railway Co. v. HennesseyTexas Supreme Court · 1889
- Interstate Building & Loan Ass'n v. GoforthTexas Supreme Court · 1900
- Magee v. WhiteTexas Supreme Court · 1859
- Goldberg v. ZellnerTexas Commission of Appeals · 1921
- Read v. AllenTexas Supreme Court · 1882
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.