Barrett v. Featherstone
| Decision Date | 25 May 1896 |
| Citation | 36 S.W. 245 |
| Parties | BARRETT v. FEATHERSTONE et al. |
| Court | Texas Supreme Court |
Action by W. H. Featherstone and others against L. C. Barrett. There was a judgment of the court of civil appeals affirming a judgment for plaintiffs (35 S. W. 11), and the case was transferred to the supreme court on certificate of dissent. Affirmed.
Stine, Chesnutt & Hurt and Hogsett & Orrick, for appellant. Templeton & Patton, for appellees.
W. H. Featherstone and others recovered a judgment in the district court against L. C. Barrett upon a promissory note, and obtained a decree directing a sale of a tract of land which had been mortgaged by defendant to secure the payment of the debt. The defendant appealed to the court of civil appeals of the Second district, where the judgment was affirmed (35 S. W. 11). One of the justices of that court having dissented, the points of dissent have been certified to this court for our determination. With the aid of the opinion of the court and of the dissenting opinion, which ably present the two sides of the controversy, we have carefully considered the case, and have arrived at the result that we concur in the conclusions of the majority of the court upon the questions presented by the certificate of dissent, and are of opinion that the judgment should stand affirmed. The opinion of the court is exhaustive and satisfactory, and renders any additional remarks from us unnecessary. Our conclusions will be certified to the court of civil appeals of the Second district.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Thornell v. Missouri State Life Ins. Co.
...and the like may be offered in evidence as admissions of the party filing them. Barrett v. Featherstone, 89 Tex. 567, 35 S. W. 11, 36 S. W. 245; T. & P. Ry. Co. v. Goggin, 33 Tex. Civ. App. 667, 77 S. W. There was no application to the Supreme Court for writ of error in the case just quoted......
-
Hewitt v. Buchanan
...required in laying Kittanning brick. Brenneman v. Bush (Tex. Civ. App.) 30 S. W. 699; Barrett v. Featherston, 89 Tex. 567, 35 S. W. 12, 36 S. W. 245; v. Brown (Tex. Civ. App.) 126 S. W. 17; Butcher v. Smith (Tex. Civ. App.) 195 S. W. 1180; Wood v. City of Fort Wayne, 119 U. S. 312, 7 S. Ct.......
-
Lantry-Sharpe Contracting Co. v. McCracken
...reverses itself upon this proposition on the authority of Barrett v. Featherstone, decided by our Supreme Court. 89 Tex. 567, 35 S. W. 11, 36 S. W. 245. We do not understand that case to be authority for the proposition that an abandoned answer, not signed by the defendant, nor sworn to by ......
-
Kennedy v. Texas Employers Ins. Ass'n.
...v. Junkin (Tex.Civ.App.) 75 S.W. (2d) 712, 714, and authorities there cited, including Barrett v. Featherstone, 89 Tex. 567, 35 S.W. 11, 36 S.W. 245; Wortman v. Young (Tex.Civ.App.) 221 S.W. 660; Laybourne v. Bray & Shifflett (Tex.Civ. App.) 190 S.W. 1159; Landrum v. Thomas (Tex.Civ.App.) 1......