Otto v. Halff & Bro.
Texas Supreme Court
2. Findings of Facts by Trial Court. Error to Court of Civil Appeals for Fifth District, in an appeal from Bexar County. Louis and J. A. Otto sued Halff & Bro. to cancel a note given by plaintiffs in settlement of an account and to enjoin defendants from disposing of collateral notes pledged to secure it. Defendants admitted and sought to justify the alteration and asked judgment on the original consideration. Plaintiffs had judgment cancelling the note.
Read the full summary
2. Findings of Facts by Trial Court. Error to Court of Civil Appeals for Fifth District, in an appeal from Bexar County. Louis and J. A. Otto sued Halff & Bro. to cancel a note given by plaintiffs in settlement of an account and to enjoin defendants from disposing of collateral notes pledged to secure it. Defendants admitted and sought to justify the alteration and asked judgment on the original consideration. Plaintiffs had judgment cancelling the note. Defendants had judgment against plaintiffs for balance due on the original account and the col-laterals were held to secure it. This…
1Opinion of the Court
BBOWH, Associate Justice.
On December 18, 1893, L. Otto was indebted to M. Half & Bro. on open account for merchandise sold him to the amount of $2635.11, to become due in January and February, 1894. ,On that date defendants agreed with J. A. Otto, who represented L. Otto as his agent, on terms of settlement, as follows: L. Otto to pay cash $297.41 and to give a note for $2337.70, to become due ¡November 1, 1894, to bear interest from date at ten per cent, per annum, to be secured by a deposit with the defendants of four notes of M. and B. J. Ellis payable to L. Otto for the sum of $513.40…
2Cases cited16 opinions
- Booth v. . PowersNew York Court of Appeals · 1874
- Greenwood v. CurtisMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1810
- Muldon v. WhitlockNew York Supreme Court · 1823
- Frisbie v. LarnedNew York Supreme Court · 1839
- Hushes v. WheelerCourt for the Trial of Impeachments and Correction of Errors · 1827
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by55 opinions
- United Concrete Pipe Corp. v. Spin-Line Co.Texas Supreme Court · 1968
- First State Bank of Riesel v. DyerTexas Supreme Court · 1953
- Page v. Superior Stone Products, Inc.Court of Appeals of Texas · 1967
- Baldwin v. Haskell National BankTexas Supreme Court · 1911
- Chapman v. CrichetTexas Supreme Court · 1936
50 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.