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: 171
The following text was automatically extracted from the image on this page using optical character recognition software:
1875.] GAMMAGE V. MOORE. 71
Opinion of the court.
writing previously made by them as master mechanics, for
which they were to furnish the materials for the building
and do work for the defendant below, T. T. Gammage,
and that by mistake in drawing the note the word "gold,"
in connection with the word dollars, was left out, and
that the contract for said building was in writing, and
stipulated that the amount contracted to be paid for said
building was therein contracted to be paid in gold.
It is a common doctrine in equity, that where there is a
mistake made in drawing an instrument embodying a
contract, such mistake may be alleged, and, if satisfactorily
established by evidence, the instrument may be reformed
to correspond with the real contract, and a decree
may be rendered thereon accordingly.
Therefore, on this.point there is no error. The petition
shows that the note for said balance was executed on the
24th day of April, 1872, and that the contract for the
building of said house was in writing, and executed before
that time, but when, or how long before, is not stated.
It also states the work was done and materials furnished
in the last part of the year 1871, and the first part of 1872,
being completed at the date of the note, 24th of April,
1872, and that the building contract, though in writing,
was not recorded, being left in the hands of the defendant
below, and gives him notice to produce it on the trial.
The defendant below files, as an exhibit to his answer,
what purports to be a building contract, signed by T. T.
Ganmnage alone, which is dated the 14th day of December,
1871, which appears in the record. This answer was
denied, and replied to by the plaintiffs below. And, in
the absence of a statement of facts, we have no authority
for regarding this as the contract in writing, which we
must, from the finding in the verdict of the jury, presume
the plaintiffs below did establish in evidence on the trial
in support of the allegations of their petition.
This court is asked by plaintiff in error to regard that
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/m1/179/: accessed February 21, 2018), University of North Texas Libraries, The Portal to Texas History, texashistory.unt.edu; .