Young v. Smith

Decision Date01 January 1858
Citation22 Tex. 345
PartiesHUGH R. YOUNG v. P. D. SMITH.
CourtTexas Supreme Court
OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE

The plaintiff alleged in his petition, that at the special instance and request of P. D. S., guardian of the estates and persons of G. and M. S., minors, he furnished board and goods to said minors; and attached separate accounts for the same to the petition, as parts thereof, which purported to be against said P. D. S., guardian; these were sworn to, as just and correct, by plaintiff, and were indorsed, “presented to me and rejected, P. D. S., guardian;” and plaintiff alleged, that said P. D. S., guardian as aforesaid, thereby became indebted, etc., and prayed for judgment against said P. D. S.: Held, that the suit was properly brought against P. D. S. individually, and not as guardian; and the judgment of the district court, that the suit should abate, because of the joinder of separate causes of action, against said P. D. S., as guardian of said minors, whose estates were separate, and whose persons and estates he represented by distinct and separate authority, was reversed.

ERROR from Guadalupe.Tried below before the Hon. Alexander W. Terrell.

Suit by appellant, against appellee.The petition was filed August 27th, 1857, and alleged that at the special instance and request of Peter D. Smith, of the county of Guadalupe, and state aforesaid, guardian of the estates and persons of Gertrude and Margaret Smith, minors, the petitioner furnished board, and certain goods, to the said wards of P. D. Smith; and at the special instance and request of said Smith, the petitioner paid tuition, and other fees, for the instruction and education of said wards; all of which would more fully appear by reference to the accounts and receipts thereto appended, marked “A,”“B,” and “C,” and prayed to be taken as a part of the petition.And petitioner averred that said Peter D. Smith, guardian as aforesaid, thereby became indebted to the petitioner in the sum of $170.06, which he promised to pay, when afterwards requested; and petitioner averred that said sum was due and wholly unpaid, and said Smith had wholly failed and refused, and still fails and refuses to pay the same, or any part thereof; wherefore petitioner prayed judgment against said Peter D. Smith, for the sum of $170.06, interest and costs.And petitioner will ever pray.

??A.”

Peter D. Smith, guardian of the estate and person of Margaret Smith, minor heir of C. A. Smith, deceased,

To Hugh R. Young, Dr.

+-----------------------------------------------------------------------------+
                ¦To board from 1st of August, 1855, to the 1st of August, 1856, at $5  ¦$ 60  ¦
                ¦per month                                                             ¦00    ¦
                +----------------------------------------------------------------------+------¦
                ¦From 10th of December, 1856, to 25th of May, 1857, at $5 per month    ¦25 00 ¦
                +----------------------------------------------------------------------+------¦
                ¦Tuition fees in Paine Female Institute                                ¦13 00 ¦
                +----------------------------------------------------------------------+------¦
                ¦Goods bought for her                                                  ¦3 86  ¦
                +----------------------------------------------------------------------+------¦
                ¦                                                                      ¦$101  ¦
                ¦                                                                      ¦86    ¦
                +-----------------------------------------------------------------------------+
                

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Guadalupe county.

I, H. R. Young, solemnly swear that the foregoing account is just and correct, all proper credits having been given.

Sworn to and subscribed this August. 5, 1857, before me.

HUGH R. YOUNG.

A. N. ERSKINE, Cl'k C. C.

By A. R. MOORE, D. C.

The above account was presented to me and rejected.

PETER D. SMITH,...

Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI

Get Started for Free

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex
3 cases
  • Adriance v. Crews
    • United States
    • Texas Supreme Court
    • January 01, 1876
    ...substantially settled by former decisions, inconsistent with the ruling of the District Court. (Caldwell v. Young and Morgan, 21 Tex., 800;Price v. McIver, 25 Tex., 769;Davenport v. Lawrence, 19 Tex., 317;Young v. Smith, 22 Tex., 347;Jones v. Lewis, 11 Tex., 364;Portis v. Cole, 11 Tex., 157.) The result of these cases may be stated by a quotation from the opinion in Price v. McIver, by Chief Justice Wheeler: “The provisions of the...
  • Reinstein v. Smith, Case No. 2122.
    • United States
    • Texas Supreme Court
    • January 12, 1886
    ...Adriance v. Crews, 45 Tex. 181;Price v. McIver, 25 Tex. 769;Caldwell v. Young & Morgan, 21 Tex. 800;Andrus v Pettus, 36 Tex. 108;Timmel v. Philleo, 33 Tex. 395;Davenport v. Lawrence, 19 Tex. 317;Young v. Smith, 22 Tex. 345;Jones v. Lewis, 11 Tex. 359;Portis v. Cole, 11 Tex. 157.C. R. Breedlove, for appellee, cited: McMahan v. Harbert's Adm'r, 35 Tex. 451; McKinney v. Peters, Dallam, 545.STAYTON, ASSOCIATE...
  • Owens v. Mitchell
    • United States
    • Texas Supreme Court
    • January 01, 1873
    ...Forcing plaintiff to take final judgment against Mitchell personally, when his prayer was for judgment against the estate of the Briscoes.P. E. Pearson, for plaintiff in error, cited 2 Story, Equity, §§ 1251, 1250; Young v. Smith, 22 Tex. 347;Caldwell v. Young & Morgan, 21 Tex. 801;Price v. McIver, 25 Tex. 771;Hastings v. Bachelor, 27 Tex. 259; Pas. Dig. arts. 3903, 1311, 1349, 1810; Harrison v. Knight, 7 Tex. 51, 52; Sayles' Probate Law, § 370.No...