Alexander v. Bank of Lebanon
Court of Appeals of Texas
Appeal from McLennan. Tried below before Hon. Marshall Surratt.
1Opinion of the Court
KEY, Associate Justice.
Appellee sued appellant on three promissory notes, one of which was barred by limitation and was eliminated from the ease by the court’s charge. Verdict and judgment were rendered for appellee for the amount of the other two notes, and the defendant has appealed. As to these two notes, appellant interposed the following defense:
“é. Defendant further says, answering plaintiff’s suit on the two $1100 notes described in his petition, dated October 18, 1892, that said two $1100 notes were executed and delivered to said E. Harper upon the distinct understanding and agreement…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Swift v. TysonSupreme Court of the United States · 1842
- Herman v. GunterTexas Supreme Court · 1892
- Harrington v. H. B. Claflin & Co.Texas Supreme Court · 1897
- Heffron v. CunninghamTexas Supreme Court · 1890
- Brown v. Thompson & OhmstedeTexas Supreme Court · 1890
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by9 opinions
- Lyle v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1917
- Harper v. First State Bank of Grand PrairieCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1928
- Lamb v. HardyTexas Supreme Court · 1919
- Commercial Guaranty State Bank v. City of LongviewCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1928
- Third Nat. Bank of Springfield v. National Bank of CommerceCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1911
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.