Wolf v. Willingham
| Decision Date | 15 January 1908 |
| Parties | WOLF v. WILLINGHAM. |
| Court | Texas Court of Appeals |
Appeal from District Court, Travis County; Geo. Calhoun, Judge.
Action by Charles Wolf against A. P. Willingham. From a judgment for defendant, plaintiff appeals. Reversed and remanded.
Sidon Harris, for appellant. S. C. Rowe, for appellee.
This is the second appeal in this case. Wolf v. Willingham (Tex. Civ. App.) 94 S. W. 362. The suit was brought in the district court of Travis county to recover a tract of land situated in Mason county, and it appeared from the plaintiff's petition that the defendant resided in the latter county. The original petition was filed August 16, 1905. The record contains two original answers filed by the defendant. The first was filed September 4, 1905, and contained (1) an exception to the plaintiff's petition, because it appeared therefrom that the land was situated in and the defendant resided in Mason county, "and therefore this court has no jurisdiction of the subject-matter of this suit, and to try the same"; (2) a general denial; and (3) a plea of not guilty. The trial court sustained the exception to the petition, and entered judgment dismissing the suit. That judgment was appealed from, and reversed by this court, for the reason that the exception referred to presented only the question of the jurisdiction of the trial court over the subject-matter of litigation, and that that court had jurisdiction of the subject-matter, and committed error in sustaining the exception. The second original answer of the defendant was filed August 30, 1906, and, omitting immaterial parts, reads as follows: On September 3, 1906, the defendant filed her first amended original answer containing an exception to the plaintiff's petition substantially the same as was embraced in the answer filed August 30, 1906, and a verified plea in due form, presenting the question of...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Texas Securities Corp. v. Peters
...Tex.Civ.App., 1963, no writ hist.); Leyendecker v. Harlow, 189 S.W.2d 706 (Galveston, Tex.Civ.App., 1945, ref., w.m.); Wolf v. Willingham, 48 Tex.Civ.App. 536, 107 S.W. 60 (1908, no writ hist.); Guillot v. Godchaux, 73 S.W.2d 924 (Dallas, Tex.Civ.App., 1934, no writ hist.); and Foster v. H.......
-
Leyendecker v. Harlow
...56 S.W.2d 633; Dickson v. Scharff, Tex.Civ.App., 142 S.W. 980; Gold v. Insall, Tex.Civ.App., 8 S. W.2d 542; Wolf v. Willingham, 48 Tex. Civ.App. 536, 107 S.W. 60. In other words, in the distinctive circumstances above recited as obtaining here, it seems clear that a plea of privilege in the......
-
Midkiff & Caudle v. Johnson County Savings Bank
...time, after the case had been tried in the justice court of Crockett county, and had been pending for four years. Wolfe v. Willingham, 48 Tex. Civ. App. 536, 107 S. W. 60. For the reasons herein stated, the judgment in this case is ...
-
Drake v. Great N. Ry. Co.
...improperly and without authority, she should have raised the question at the outset.” In the case of Wolf v. Willingham (Tex. Civ. App.) 107 S. W. 60, the defendant first interposed two original answers, the first one raising an issue of jurisdiction, pleading a general denial, and a plea o......