Clapp v. Nelson
Texas Supreme Court
Appeal from Houston. The plaintiff in the Court below instituted this suit on the 30th August, 1851, to recover of the defendant a wagon and two mules, which property he states he owned and possessed on the 20th day of the same month, “ Which said wagon and mules he loaned for a day “ or two to the defendant Nelson, who, although the time for “ which petitioner loaned him said property has expired, still “ withholds said wagon and mules from petitioner; and al- “ though he…
Read the full summary
Appeal from Houston. The plaintiff in the Court below instituted this suit on the 30th August, 1851, to recover of the defendant a wagon and two mules, which property he states he owned and possessed on the 20th day of the same month, “ Which said wagon and mules he loaned for a day “ or two to the defendant Nelson, who, although the time for “ which petitioner loaned him said property has expired, still “ withholds said wagon and mules from petitioner; and al- “ though he well knows said wagon and mules to be the pro- “ perty of petitioner, he has hitherto failed and refused and still “…
1Opinion of the Court
Hemphill, Ch. J.
This is an action for the recovery of specific chattels which the plaintiff alleged he had loaned for a day or two to the defendant, and which the said defendant, although the time for the loan had expired, had failed and refused to deliver or return to the plaintiff.
*373The defendant demurred, on the ground that there was no allegation in the petition, that demand had been made of the property sued for. The demurrer was sustained and the plaintiff appealed.
We are of opinion that the judgment, sustaining the demurrer, was erroneous. The plaintiff’s allegations about the loan or…
2Cited by4 opinions
- Hardie v. PetersonMontana Supreme Court · 1929
- McCarty v. WoodTexas Supreme Court · 1874
- Tindall v. McCarthySupreme Court of South Carolina · 1895
- Myers v. StateTexas Supreme Court · 1868