Eason v. Locherer
Texas Supreme Court
Appeal from Victoria, tried below before the Hon. T. C. Barden. Prior to the war, and up to September, 1862, Bagland and Coller were partners in mercantile business, and owned a storehouse and lot in Victoria. About September, 1868, they closed up their business, sold out their remnant of goods, and divided their notes and accounts, but continued to own the storehouse and lot in common.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Victoria, tried below before the Hon. T. C. Barden. Prior to the war, and up to September, 1862, Bagland and Coller were partners in mercantile business, and owned a storehouse and lot in Victoria. About September, 1868, they closed up their business, sold out their remnant of goods, and divided their notes and accounts, but continued to own the storehouse and lot in common. In August, 1866, Coller negotiated the purchase of Rag-land’s interest in this storehouse property, at the price of two thousand five hundred dollars, specie. Thirteen hundred dollars were paid about the time…
1Opinion of the CourtRoberts, C. J.
This is an action by Eason against Locherer, on a note assigned to Eason by Ragland before its maturity, to pay Eason a board bill, in amount less than the note, which Eason, being a relative of Ragland, did not demand payment of, but which Ragland insisted on paying, and which board bill was receipted upon the delivery of the note. It is shown that Ragland placed this note, with other claims, in the hands of Eason, in anticipation of debts coming against him, that he did not wish to pay, of which Eason was informed at the time. There is no evidence that Eason knew of any offset against the…
2Cited by2 opinions
- City State Bank in Wellington v. National Bank of Commerce of AltusCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1953
- McShan v. WatlingtonCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1911