Carson v. Dalton
| Decision Date | 22 May 1883 |
| Docket Number | Case No. 3598. |
| Court | Texas Supreme Court |
| Parties | J. W. CARSON ET AL. v. LUCINDA DALTON. |
OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE
APPEAL from Palo Pinto. Tried below before the Hon. J. R. Fleming.
Appellee, administratrix of the estate of M. L. Dalton, brought this suit against appellants, as partners under the firm name of Carson & Lewis, upon a promissory note as follows:
+-------------------------------------------------+
¦“$2,860, gold.¦PALO PINTO, TEXAS, March 20, 1876.¦
+-------------------------------------------------+
One day after date we promise to pay to Lucinda Dalton, administratrix of the estate of M. L. Dalton, deceased, or bearer, at Palo Pinto, Texas, the sum of two thousand eight hundred and sixty dollars in gold, for value received of her, with interest at the rate of ten per cent. per annum from date.
+--------------------------+
¦(Signed)¦CARSON & LEWIS.” ¦
+--------------------------+
The suit was brought in the district court of Palo Pinto county, and the petition showed that the defendants were resident citizens of Parker county. But one citation was issued, directed “to the sheriff or any constable of Parker county,” commanding that both defendants be summoned to appear and answer the petition, etc. The defendants moved to quash citation and service, which was overruled by the court.
The assignments of errors were as follows: 1st. Overruling motion to quash the citation and service thereon. 2d. Overruling the exceptions to the petition-- the petition and exhibits showing that the court had no jurisdiction of the persons of defendants. 3d. Sustaining exceptions to the answer. 4th. Overruling the motion for new trial. 5th. Rendering judgment against defendants.
Watts, Lanham & Roach, for appellants, cited Carroll v. Peck, 31 Tex., 650;Whitlock v. Castro, 22 Tex., 113;Cook v. Crawford, 4 Tex., 422.
J. P. Haynes, for appellee, cited Anderson v. Brown, 16 Tex., 554;Dewees v. Lockhart, 1 Tex., 535;Epperson v. Young, 8 Tex., 135.
The first assignment of error, which raises an objection to the citation, cannot be maintained.
When there are several defendants, the statute requires that a citation shall issue to each defendant. Pasch. Dig., art. 1430. The usual practice is that the citation issued to each one shall direct him to appear at the proper time and place, to answer the petition of the plaintiff exhibited against him and his co-defendants, naming them. This citation, with the copy of the petition, informs him of everything which may be necessary to his defense, viz.: The nature of the suit, the time and place of trial, the name of the plaintiff, and the names of his co-defendants. In the present case a citation was issued, directing the sheriff to summon both defendants, giving the name of the plaintiff, the time, place, etc. Two copies...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
St. Paul Fire & Marine Ins. Co. v. Earnest
...Lubbock, Lubbock county, is in the state of Texas, is immaterial. Hambel v. Davis, 89 Tex. 256, 34 S. W. 439, 59 Am. St. Rep. 46; Carson v. Dalton, 59 Tex. 500. Even if the evidence bearing upon the issue of diligence had been properly presented by a statement of facts instead of a bill of ......
-
Giles v. State
...in addition to 100 miles. Chamberlain on Modern Evidence, § 743; Railroad v. Lightfoot, 48 Tex. Civ App. 120, 106 S. W 395; Carson v Dalton, 59 Tex. 500; Whitener v. Belknap, 89 Tex. 273, 34 S. W. 594; Missouri Pac. Ry. Co. v. Graves, 2 Willson, Civ. Cas. Ct. App. § 679; Tex. & P. Ry. Co. v......
-
El Dorado & Bastrop Railway Company v. Knox
...on appellant's line of road. Both are in Union County, of which fact this court will take judicial knowledge. 53 Ark. 46; 68 Ark. 289; 59 Tex. 500; Mo. 533; 77 Ga. 584. OPINION BATTLE, J. J. A. Knox brought an action against the El Dorado & Bastrop Railway Company to recover damages caused ......
-
Barber v. Intercoast Jobbers and Brokers, B--84
...County. Burtis v. Butler Bros., 148 Tex. 543, 226 S.W.2d 825 (1950); Turner v. Tucker, 113 Tex. 434, 258 S.W. 149 (1924); Carson v. Dalton, 59 Tex. 500 (1883). Our final problem is Intercoast's insistence that the decision of the court of civil appeals was a correct one because all of the e......