Knapp v. Mills
Texas Supreme Court
Error from Washington. Tried below before the Hon. R. E. B. Baylor. The suit was commenced 27th January, 1857. The note was dated March 6th, 1855, and was payable twelve months after date. There was a judgment by default, and the plaintiff having demanded a jury to assess the damages, a jury was impanelled, and returned a verdict that they found “ for the plaintiff the amount of his debt and interest, and that the facts set forth in the plaintiff’s petition are true.”
Read the full summary
Error from Washington. Tried below before the Hon. R. E. B. Baylor. The suit was commenced 27th January, 1857. The note was dated March 6th, 1855, and was payable twelve months after date. There was a judgment by default, and the plaintiff having demanded a jury to assess the damages, a jury was impanelled, and returned a verdict that they found “ for the plaintiff the amount of his debt and interest, and that the facts set forth in the plaintiff’s petition are true.” Judgment against all the defendants for $2335 82, balance due on the note, at eight per cent, interest, with foreclosure ;…
1Opinion of the CourtRoberts, J.
The judgment complained of by plaintiff in error, Knapp, was rendered by default, against Knapp, Lewis and McNeese, in favor of defendant in error, Mills. The suit was brought on an instrument in writing, signed by them, in the nature of a note and mortgage, given for the purchase money of some slaves sold by Mills as administrator, and bought by Knapp.
The judgment rendered on this instrument in pursuance to its terms and legal effect, against all the obligors, is not objected to by any of them.
There was a subsequent agreement between Knapp alone and Mills, which was written on the face of…
2Cited by4 opinions
- Benson v. PhippsTexas Supreme Court · 1895
- Claiborne v. BirgeTexas Supreme Court · 1874
- Berhns v. HarrisCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1912
- Murdock v. LewisMissouri Court of Appeals · 1887