Cases argued and decided in the Supreme Court of Texas, during the latter part of the Tyler term, 1874, and the first part of the Galveston term, 1875. Volume 42. Page: 155
The following text was automatically extracted from the image on this page using optical character recognition software:
1875.] SNow v. WALKER. 155
Opinion of the court.
Judgment was rendered in favor of the plaintiff, who
were minors at the time of the suit in the County Court,
and against those defendants of age at that time and represented,
from which botl plaintiffs and defendants appealed.
No brief for plaintiff in error.
J. J. Hill, for defendant in error.
REEVES, ASSOCIATE JUSTICE.-The plaintiff and the defendants
in error both prosecuted writs of error from the
iudgment of the District Court, with separate assignments
of error for reversing the judgment.
Plaintiff's first assignment is understood as referring to
the ruling of the court upon his exceptions to the amended
petition, and so considering it, we are of opinion that the
court did not err in overruling the exceptions.
2. It is further complained that the court erred in ruling
that the minors, who were plaintiffs in the District Court,
were not estopped by their acts.
3. The court erred in finding for part of the plaintiffs,
whereas it should have found for defendant.
There is no appearance in this court for plaintiff in error,
and we are left to conjecture as to the acts of the minor
plaintiffs, from which it might be contended that they were
estopped from asserting any right they may have had iin
the estate of R. H. Temple, deceased.
It is not pretended that the promissory note, the subject
matter of the suit, was necessary for the payment of any
demands against the deceased, or that these minor plaintiffs
were barred, or that they could be deprived of their
share in this note or its proceeds by any law of limitation.
It was admitted on the trial that the promissory note in
controversy was executed by the plaintiff in error, and that
the minor heirs and the other parties who were plaintiffs
in the District Court are the heirs-at-law of R. II. Temple,
and that they are interested in his estate. These facts
Here’s what’s next.
This book can be searched. Note: Results may vary based on the legibility of text within the document.
Tools / Downloads
Get a copy of this page or view the extracted text.
Citing and Sharing
Basic information for referencing this web page. We also provide extended guidance on usage rights, references, copying or embedding.
Reference the current page of this Book.
Texas. Supreme Court. Cases argued and decided in the Supreme Court of Texas, during the latter part of the Tyler term, 1874, and the first part of the Galveston term, 1875. Volume 42., book, 1881; St. Louis, Mo.. (texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth28531/m1/163/: accessed July 21, 2017), University of North Texas Libraries, The Portal to Texas History, texashistory.unt.edu; .