Hendon v. Pugh
| Decision Date | 01 January 1876 |
| Citation | 46 Tex. 211 |
| Parties | J. W. HENDON v. W. N. PUGH. |
| Court | Texas Supreme Court |
OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE
ERROR from Hopkins. Tried below before the Hon. W. H. Andrews.
This was an action, brought by W. N. Pugh against J. W. Hendon, on two promissory notes, one payable to W. N. Pugh and the other payable to the order of W. N. Pugh, and to enforce a vendor's lien on the land described in the petition. Judgment by default was rendered against plaintiff in error for the amount of the notes, and enforcing vendor's lien, from which judgment a writ of error was prosecuted.
Payne & Putnam, for plaintiff in error.--There was no service authorizing a judgment by default. The return of citation must show that it was served upon the defendant. (Roberts v. Stockslager, 4 Tex., 307;Brown v. Marqueze, 30 Tex., 78;Wilson v. Johnson, 30 Tex., 499.) The return of the sheriff in this cause shows service upon J. N. Hendon, not J W. Hendon.
King & Milam, for defendant in error.
The sheriff's return on the citation for the defendant J. W. Hendon is as follows: “Came to hand January 31, 1876, and executed same day, by delivering to J. N. Hendon in person a true copy of the within citation, together with a certified copy of plaintiff's original petition.” This return fails to show, with reasonable certainty, that the citation was served on the defendant in the suit. (Brown v. Robertson, 28 Tex., 557.)
As the judgment by default was taken without a proper return on the citation showing service on the defendant, the judgment is reversed and the cause remanded.
REVERSED AND REMANDED.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Asset Protection v. Armijo
...agent for service as "Henry Bunting, Jr." but the citation and return of service reflected delivery to "Henry Bunting"); Hendon v. Pugh , 46 Tex. 211, 212 (1876) (petition identified the defendant as "J.W. Hendon" but return of service reflected delivery to "J.N. Hendon"); Faver v. Robinson......
-
Sutherland v. Spencer
...registered agent for service of process. Id. at 885. The supreme court found that this was ineffective service. Id.; see Hendon v. Pugh, 46 Tex. 211, 212 (Tex.1876) (holding that service was ineffective when service was made on “J.N. Hendon” but the petition named “J.W. Hendon” as the defen......
-
Medeles v. Nunez
..."Henry Bunting, Jr." 690 S.W.2d at 884. The court noted it was following its previous holdings voiding default judgments in Hendon v. Pugh, 46 Tex. 211, 212 (1876) (defendant named "J.W. Hendon" but citation served on "J.N. Hendon"), and Faver v. Robinson, 46 Tex. 204 (1876) (defendant name......
-
Union Pacific Corp v. Legg, 03-00-00661-CV
...failing to name the correct defendant. See Uvalde Country Club v. Martin Linen Supply Co., 690 S.W.2d 884-85 (Tex. 1985); Hendon v. Pugh, 46 Tex. 211, 212 (1876); Faver v. Robinson, 46 Tex. 204 (1876); Pharmakinetics Lab., Inc. v. Katz, 717 S.W.2d 704, 706 (Tex. App.-San Antonio 1986, no wr......