Record v. Chisum
Texas Supreme Court
Error from Dallas. Tried below before the Hon. W. S. Todd. . Suit brought by the defendant in error against J. J. Record and others as makers of an instrument, in the petition called a promissory note of the following tenor: “ Four months after date we, or either of us, promise to pay W. T. Gibbons or Wm. Bell the sum of twelve hundred dollars, with twelve per cent interest per annum till paid, this the tenth day of May, 1857.” Signed by the defendants.
Read the full summary
Error from Dallas. Tried below before the Hon. W. S. Todd. . Suit brought by the defendant in error against J. J. Record and others as makers of an instrument, in the petition called a promissory note of the following tenor: “ Four months after date we, or either of us, promise to pay W. T. Gibbons or Wm. Bell the sum of twelve hundred dollars, with twelve per cent interest per annum till paid, this the tenth day of May, 1857.” Signed by the defendants. Endorsed thereon is a credit of five hundred dollars and the following assignment: “ For value received I assign this to James Chisum, this…
1Opinion of the CourtBell, J.
We are of opinion that the court below did not err in overruling the demurrer to the petition. The petition calls the *349instrument sued on a promissory note, and alleges that the note was transferred'!» the petitioner for value. The note sued on is made a part of the petition, and the assignment, which is written on the note, shows that it was for value received by the assignor-. We are of opinion that the instrument upon which the , suit is brought shows a special contract between the original parties, whereby the maker of the instrument undertook to pay to either of the persons named as…
2Cited by3 opinions
- Robbins v. Estate of RobbinsMissouri Court of Appeals · 1913
- Collyer v. CookIndiana Court of Appeals · 1902
- Mulcahey v. Emigrant Industrial Savings BankNew York Court of Common Pleas · 1881