Humason v. Lobe
| Decision Date | 18 March 1890 |
| Citation | 13 S.W. 382 |
| Court | Texas Supreme Court |
| Parties | HUMASON <I>v.</I> LOBE <I>et al.</I> |
James E. Hill, for appellant.
Lobe & Sons, residents of the city of New Orleans, La., sued the appellant, T. N. Humason, in the district court of Harris county, in January, 1889, on a promissory note executed by the latter to the former for $691.25, and also upon a verified account for $34, dated August 15, 1887. An affidavit for attachment was made by the agent of appellees. In March, 1889, appellant filed a sworn plea of res adjudicata, alleging that there is in the district court of Polk county a valid judgment between the same parties to this suit, involving the same subject matter and cause of action here in issue. In reply appellees pleaded a general denial, and, further, that, "if the facts stated in said plea are true, no execution had issued on said judgment, and it was dormant, and that they were entitled to their action for their debt." The cause was tried by the court. The attorney who brought this suit testified that "he did not know when this suit was filed that they had a judgment against appellant in the district court of Polk county, nor did he know that it had any connection with this suit." The appellant, Humason, testified that The judgment in the district court of Polk county was rendered on December 9, 1887, with a stay of execution for 60 days. This suit was filed on January 5, 1889. Upon the foregoing facts, the court below found against the defendant's plea, and entered judgment in favor of plaintiffs for $814 and costs, and foreclosing the attachment lien on lots and buildings in Corrigan, Polk county. The defendant appeals, and assigns as error, in effect, the action of the court below in finding against his plea of res adjudicata, and in rendering judgment for the plaintiffs. We think there was error in the...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Southern Fire Ins. Co v. Knight
...Flatley v. Insurance Co., 95 Wis. 618, 70 N. W. 828; Kahnweiler v. Insurance Co. (C. C.) 57 Fed. 562; Insurance Co. v. Downs, 90 Ky. 236, 13 S. W. 382; Insurance Ass'n v. Evans, 102 Pa. St. 281; Taber v. Insurance Co. (Ala.) 26 South. 252; Rheims v. Insurance Co., 39 W. Va. 672, 20 S. E. 67......
-
Railway Company v. Davis
...was no evidence of the defect of the drawhead or coupling apparatus, or that the injury was caused thereby. 51 Ark. 477; 46 id., 566; 13 S.W. 382. 2. using unblocked rail or switch is not negligence, there being no statute requiring it. 35 Ark. 615; 28 A. & E. R. Cas., 488; 118 Ill. 45; 71 ......
-
Spaulding Mfg. Co. v. Blankenship
...that the justice of the peace obeyed the requirements of the law as to the issuance of the original execution, and in Humason v. Lobe & Son, 76 Tex. 512, 13 S. W. 382, our Supreme Court held that the court will not presume that an execution upon a judgment was not issued within one year aft......
-
Santleben v. Alamo Cement Co.
...of San Antonio, 23 S. W. 449. The matter is res adjudicata, and the cause should have been dismissed in the lower court. Humason v. Lobe, 76 Tex. 512, 13 S. W. 382; Sweetman v. Stratton, 74 Tex. 76, 11 S. W. 1055. There is no pretense that a judgment was not rendered against Lewis for the s......