Wright v. Ragland

• Decision Date: 01 January 1857
• Citation: 18 Tex. 289
• Parties: WILLIAM WRIGHT AND OTHERS v. WILLIAM S. RAGLAND.
• Court: Texas Supreme Court

18 Tex. 289

WILLIAM WRIGHT AND OTHERS

v.WILLIAM S. RAGLAND.

Supreme Court of Texas.

1857.

Where the petition alleged that the plaintiffs and defendant were non-residents of this state, but that the defendant had property in the county where the suit was commenced, it was held that the allegation as to the defendant's property was of a jurisdictional fact, which it was not necessary the plaintiffs should verify by affidavit, in order to obtain an attachment; that the separate affidavit of the non-residence of the defendant, that the claim was just, stating the amount due, and that the attachment was not sued out to injure or harass the defendant, was sufficient. 11 Tex. 287;13 Tex. 368;14 Tex. 1;15 Tex. 568;16 Tex. 47;24 Tex. 225.

In a suit against the maker of drafts drawn in Mississippi on merchants in ““Mobile, Ala.,” where the rate of interest of neither of said states was alleged, but it was alleged that the defendant was indebted to plaintiffs in a certain amount (the principal of the drafts), “exclusive of interest,” and the prayer was for “said sum, damages and costs of suit, and for other necessary and proper relief,” it was held that it was not good ground to quash an attachment obtained, that the affidavit stated that the defendant was justly indebted to the plaintiffs in the sum of ten hundred and one dollars and ninety-eight cents, principal, exclusive of interest, and did not state the amount of interest claimed, if any.

Where attachment was obtained on the ground that the defendant was a nonresident of this state, it was held that it was not sufficient ground to quash the attachment, that the affidavit was made in New York on the 9th of June, and was not filed until the 3d of July.

Where the bond for attachment recited that the plaintiffs, naming them, “have this day sued out an attachment,” and a motion to quash on the ground that it appeared by the recitals of the bond that it was executed after the writ of attachment was issued, and on other grounds, was sustained by the court below, it was held, on error, that it did not so appear from said recital.

Error from Victoria. Tried below before the Hon. Fielding Jones.

Suit commenced July 3rd, 1855, by William Wright, William Faitule and Frederick B. Betts, residents of the city and state of New York, alleging that William S. Ragland, a nonresident of the state of Texas, has effects and credits in the state of Texas, and county of Victoria, and is indebted to your petitioners in the sum of $1,001 98-100, exclusive of interest, for this that heretofore, to wit: in the county of Lauderdale, Mississippi, on the 6th day of April, 1854, he executed his draft or promissory note in effect as follows: Here followed the copy of a draft, dated as aforesaid, for $488 83-100, at ten months, to the order of the plaintiffs, on Messrs. A. E. & W. J. Ledgerd, merchants, Mobile, Ala.; acceptance waived; signed by defendant. Then followed similar allegations and copy of similar draft for $513.15. Allegation of failure and refusal to pay; damages laid at $1,500; prayer for judgment, for said sum, damages, and costs of suit, and for other necessary and proper relief.

Affidavit filed July 3d, 1855, as follows: Frederick B. Betts, one of the partners in the firm of Wright, Betts & Co., and one of the plaintiffs in this suit, states on oath, that the defendant, William S. Ragland, is justly indebted to the plaintiffs in the sum of ten hundred and one dollars and ninety-eight cents, principal, exclusive of interest. He further states that the defendant is not a resident of the state of Texas, and that this attachment is not sued out for the purpose of injuring the defendant. (Signed) Frederick B. Betts.

Sworn to and subscribed before me this 9th day of June, 1855, as witness my hand and official seal as commissioner for Texas in New York. (Seal.) Signed, John Livingston, commissioner for Texas in New York.

Bond filed same day, as follows:

Know all men by these presents, that we, the undersigned, are held and firmly bound unto William S. Ragland, in the sum of two thousand one hundred dollars, for the payment of which we bind ourselves and our heirs; signed and sealed on this 3d day of July, A. D. 1855.

The condition of the above obligation is as follows: Whereas, William Wright, William S. Faitule and Frederick B. Betts, merchants, trading under the name and style of Wright, Betts & Co., have this day sued out an attachment against the property of the said William H. Ragland, in the district court of Victoria county; now if the said Wright, Betts & Faitule, plaintiffs in said attachment, shall prosecute their suit with effect, and pay such damages as shall be adjudged against them for wrongfully suing out said attachment, then this obligation to be null and void, otherwise to remain in full force and virtue.

+--------------------------------------+
                ¦(Signed)¦A. S. CUNNINGHAM, [L. S.]    ¦
                +--------+-----------------------------¦
                ¦        ¦Att'y for Wright, Betts & Co.¦
                +--------+-----------------------------¦
                ¦        ¦J. O. WHEELER, [L. S.]       ¦
                +--------+-----------------------------¦
                ¦        ¦J. L. NICKELSON, [L. S.]     ¦
                +--------------------------------------+
                

Approved, July 3d, 1...