Goodson v. Johnson
Texas Supreme Court
Error from Hopkins. Tried below before the Hon. W. H. Andrews. The note sued on was made by W. J. Goodson and James Wheeler, on the sixth of March, 1861, and was payable to Wiley Tumlinson or bearer, on or before the twenty-second of January, 1863. The indorsement of it to the plaintiff Johnson purported to have been made on the eighteenth of January, 1863, which was a few days prior to its maturity.
Read the full summary
Error from Hopkins. Tried below before the Hon. W. H. Andrews. The note sued on was made by W. J. Goodson and James Wheeler, on the sixth of March, 1861, and was payable to Wiley Tumlinson or bearer, on or before the twenty-second of January, 1863. The indorsement of it to the plaintiff Johnson purported to have been made on the eighteenth of January, 1863, which was a few days prior to its maturity. The defendants, however, proved that it was never in the possession of the payee until long after maturity. The defense was want and failure of consideration. It was alleged in the answers that…
1Opinion of the CourtOgden, J.
It has been repeatedly decided by this court that if an affidavit on the first and second application for a continuance complies with the requirements of the statute, it relieves the court of all discretion in the matter, and the continuance applied for will be granted as a matter of right.
We think the affidavit filed in this cause a sufficient compliance with the statute to entitle the parties to a continuance. The defense set up to the note sued on is a failure of consideration; that the note was never delivered to the payee thereof by and with the knowledge and consent, of the makers; but…
2Cited by5 opinions
- Farnsworth v. DolchCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1972
- Bute v. WilliamsCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1913
- Terhune v. First National BankCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1900
- Leavitt v. PeabodySupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1882
- Barth v. Jester Bros.Court of Appeals of Texas · 1886