Cox v. Reinhardt
Texas Supreme Court
Error from Anderson. Tried below before the Hon. John G. Scott. On May 20, 1872, Aug. Reinhardt brought suit against George M. Cox, on a promissory note payable on same day for two hundred dollars, and for twenty dollars for work and labor.
Read the full summary
Error from Anderson. Tried below before the Hon. John G. Scott. On May 20, 1872, Aug. Reinhardt brought suit against George M. Cox, on a promissory note payable on same day for two hundred dollars, and for twenty dollars for work and labor. At same time affidavit for attachment was filed, alleging, as did the petition, that Cox was justly indebted to petitioner in the sum of two hundred and twenty dollars, and that Cox is about to transfer his property for the purpose of defrauding his creditors, &c. The attachment was issued and levied on four mules. Defendant excepted to the petition and to…
1Opinion of the Court
Moore, Associate Justice.
It clearly appears upon the face of the petition of Reinhardt, the plaintiff in the District-Court, that the note for two hundred dollars was not due when he brought his suit upon it. It has been held by this court that days of grace were only allowed by our former statute on bills and notes assignable and negotiable by law, which are contracts between merchant and merchant, their factors and agents. (Oliphant v. Dallas, 15 Tex., 138; Moore v. Hollaman, 25 Tex. Supp., 81; Campbell v. Lane, 25 Tex. Supp., 93.) But no such distinction is made by the present statute.…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Sydnor v. TothamTexas Supreme Court · 1851
- Oliphant v. DallasTexas Supreme Court · 1855
3Cited by12 opinions
- Gimbel & Son v. J. Gomprecht & Co.Texas Supreme Court · 1896
- Crescent Ins. v. CampTexas Supreme Court · 1885
- Donnelly v. ElserTexas Supreme Court · 1887
- P. J. Willis & Bro. v. Mooring & BlanchardTexas Supreme Court · 1885
- Evans & Martin v. TuckerTexas Supreme Court · 1883
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.