Lawyers Lloyds of Texas v. Webb, 2310.
| Decision Date | 09 October 1941 |
| Docket Number | No. 2310.,2310. |
| Citation | 154 S.W.2d 867 |
| Parties | LAWYERS LLOYDS OF TEXAS v. WEBB et al. |
| Court | Texas Court of Appeals |
Currie McCutcheon and Bruce Graham, both of Dallas, Gene Maddin, of Waco, Norton Fox, of Groesbeck, and Doss Hardin, of Dallas, for plaintiff in error.
L. W. Shepperd and B. L. Bradley, both of Groesbeck, for defendants in error.
J. F. Russell and wife, Leora Dyer Russell, filed this suit in the district court of Limestone county against Juanita Webb and the Lincoln National Life Insurance Company in trespass to try title. Juanita Webb filed a cross action in trespass to try title against the plaintiffs, and procured a writ of sequestration to be issued out of said court and levied on the land involved. Thereupon plaintiffs, as principals, and T. A. Chapman, O. L. Wallard, A. E. McNairy, H. H. Thomason, A. J. Hargrove, J. P. Anderton, H. A. Dyer and Lawyers Lloyds of Texas, as sureties, executed a replevy bond, and the possession of said land was delivered to the plaintiffs on March 15, 1939, and by them retained until October 26th of said year.
The case was tried to a jury, but upon the completion of the evidence the trial court sustained Juanita Webb's general demurrer to plaintiffs' cause of action, and the jury, pursuant to the instruction of the court, returned its verdict in favor of Juanita Webb on her cross action, and on October 12, 1939, the court rendered judgment in favor of Juanita Webb and against plaintiffs for the title and possession of the land involved; that plaintiffs recover nothing against the Lincoln National Life Insurance Company; and that Juanita Webb recover of plaintiffs and the above mentioned sureties on the replevy bond, jointly and severally, the sum of $1972.13 and costs of court.
From the above mentioned judgment plaintiffs J. F. Russell and wife, Leora Dyer Russell, principals on the replevy bond, and the above named sureties thereon (the latter being hereinafter styled surety defendants) attempted to appeal to this court by writ of error. This court dismissed the appeal of each of said appellants on the theory that Article 2249a, Vernon's Ann.Civ.Stats., applied to the surety defendants as well as to the principals on said bond. See Lawyers Lloyds of Texas v. Webb, Tex.Civ.App., 150 S.W.2d 181.
The surety defendants alone appealed from the judgment of this court; and it was the judgment of the Supreme Court that this court committed error in dismissing the appeal of said surety defendants, and this cause was remanded to this court for further proceedings in accordance...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Bayham v. Maryland Nat. Ins. Co.
...to contest the liability between the parties. Lindsey v. Williams, Tex.Civ.App. (1950), 228 S.W.2d 243; Lawyers Lloyds of Texas v. Webb, Tex.Civ.App. (1941), 154 S.W.2d 867. The judgment entered against the surety was not a judgment by default but was a judgment by summary action based upon......
-
Lindsey v. Williams
...the case to the defendants and it is not permitted to contest the liability of the defendants to the plaintiff. Lawyers Lloyds of Texas v. Webb, Tex.Civ.App., 154 S.W.2d 867, and cases cited therein. The surety not being a party to the suit for all purposes, he cannot object to an agreed ju......
-
Pinkard v. Hobbs Mfg. Co., 14462.
...Tex.Civ.App., 91 S.W.2d 1156, and it is obvious that he did not attempt to do so. Furthermore, as is said in Lawyers Lloyds of Texas v. Webb, Tex.Civ.App., 154 S.W.2d 867, 868: "It appears to be the general rule that sureties upon a bond given to replevy property in a sequestration proceedi......
-
Shapiro v. Sampson Bros. & Cooper, Inc., 3496
...abide by the judgment against the principal, as, by the terms of the bond, they had obligated themselves to do. Lawyers Lloyds of Texas v. Webb, Tex.Civ.App., 154 S.W.2d 867, and cases cited We also overrule appellants' point urging that the record shows error in that the judgment against t......