Furlow v. Miller
Texas Supreme Court
Error from Houston. The case was tried before Hon. Reuben A. Reeves, one of the district judges. The original petition declared for the debt. Of this there was service, but no appearance. At a subsequent term, the plaintiff amended, and declared for the foreclosure of the vendor’s lien on the land for which the note was given; hut of this amendment the defendant was given no notice.
Read the full summary
Error from Houston. The case was tried before Hon. Reuben A. Reeves, one of the district judges. The original petition declared for the debt. Of this there was service, but no appearance. At a subsequent term, the plaintiff amended, and declared for the foreclosure of the vendor’s lien on the land for which the note was given; hut of this amendment the defendant was given no notice. The judgment was by default, and the defendant prosecuted error, and in his petition he assigned several causes; hut he made no mention of the amendment upon which the case turned. The defendants in error…
1Opinion of the CourtMoore, C. J.
The plaintiffs in error, who were defendants in the district court, were duly served with a copy of the original petition, by which they were notified that a judgment was asked against them simply for the amount due on the note described in the petition. The plaintiffs below, however, subsequently amended their petition, and alleged that the note sued on was given in payment of a tract of land upon which they claimed a vendor’s lien, as security for its payment. Without service of this amended petition, or an appearance of the plaintiffs in error, a judgment by default was entered against…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Morrison v. WalkerTexas Supreme Court · 1858
3Cited by3 opinions
- Roller v. RiedTexas Supreme Court · 1894
- T. & N. O. R. R. Co. v. WhiteTexas Supreme Court · 1881
- Mo. Pac. R'y Co. v. PattersonCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1885