Wood v. Smith
Texas Supreme Court
Error from Grimes., Smith sued Wood and King, upon their joint promissory note. The citation contained only the name of the defendant Wood. It was served upon Wood only; who appeared and moved to quash the citation, because it did not contain the names of the parties to the suit. The motion was sustained, and leave given to the Clerk to amend.
Read the full summary
Error from Grimes., Smith sued Wood and King, upon their joint promissory note. The citation contained only the name of the defendant Wood. It was served upon Wood only; who appeared and moved to quash the citation, because it did not contain the names of the parties to the suit. The motion was sustained, and leave given to the Clerk to amend. And, thereupon, the defendant Wood failing to make defence, and the defendant King failing to appear, judgment was rendered against both defendants. The defendant Wood prosecuted the writ of error, and assigned as error, the ruling of the Court…
1Opinion of the CourtWheeler, J.
The writ was properly quashed, under the *368ruling of this Court in the case of Burleson v. Henderson, (4 Tex. R. 49.) And it was also proper for the Court to give leave to amend the writ. (Cartwright v. Chabert, 3 Tex. R. 261.) Bnt the party does not appear to have availed himself of the leave given. Ho amendment appears to have been made. And the Court proceeded to give judgment final, when the writ, served upon the defendant, had been quashed, and had not been reinstated by amendment, and he had not appeared, or answered, to the action. This was error.
There was no service upon the defendant…
2Cited by10 opinions
- J. M. Hamilton & Co. v. PrescottTexas Supreme Court · 1889
- Bradford v. TaylorTexas Supreme Court · 1885
- King v. ParksCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1901
- McRea v. McWilliamsTexas Supreme Court · 1883
- Pagan v. QuiñonesSupreme Court of Puerto Rico · 1907
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.