Boetge v. Landa
Texas Supreme Court
Error from Comal. Tried below before the Hon. Tbomas J. Devine. Suit by defendant in error, against plaintiff in error, and Frederick Behrens, who was cited by publication as a non-resident of the State, and for whom there was no appearance.
Read the full summary
Error from Comal. Tried below before the Hon. Tbomas J. Devine. Suit by defendant in error, against plaintiff in error, and Frederick Behrens, who was cited by publication as a non-resident of the State, and for whom there was no appearance. There was a judgment for the defendant in error against Behrens, for $400, and against the plaintiff in error for $200. Upon the trial, the judge charged the jury, “ The defendant “Boetge’s liability depends upon either of the following questions: “1st. Was the credit given, or advance of money by Landa “made, as a credit or advance to, or charge against…
1Opinion of the CourtBell, J.
We do not discover any error in the proceedings in the court below, which will require us to disturb the judgment. There is no statement of facts in the record. The petition charged fraud and combination on the part of both defendants in the court below, to procure money from the plaintiff, and there was an allegation that the four hundred dollars first paid by Landa on the draft of Behrens, was divided equally between Behrens and Boetge. We perceive no error in the instructions of the court to the jury. The liability of Boetge was put on clear and proper grounds by the judge, and we must…
2Cited by15 opinions
- Keith v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · 1912
- El Paso Electric Co. v. WhitenackTexas Commission of Appeals · 1928
- City of Dallas v. Firestone Tire & Rubber Co.Court of Appeals of Texas · 1933
- Herrin Transp. Co. v. PetersonCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1948
- McMicken v. CommonwealthSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1868
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.