Bates v. J. F. Evans & Co.

2 Wilson 165
CourtCourt of Appeals of Texas
DecidedMay 31, 1884
DocketNo. 2941
StatusPublished

This text of 2 Wilson 165 (Bates v. J. F. Evans & Co.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Texas primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Bates v. J. F. Evans & Co., 2 Wilson 165 (Tex. Ct. App. 1884).

Opinion

Opinion by

Willson, J.

§211. Amendment of petition, not permissible after a judgment by default. It is not permissible for the plaintiff to amend his petition after he has taken a judgment by default, without first having the judgment set aside. But this objection to an amended petition cannot be entertained when made for the first time in the appellate* court. [Portwood v. Wellburn, 33 Tex. 713; Tullis v. Scott, 38 Tex. 537.]

§212. Admission of principal binds sureties. This was a suit upon a written obligation against.a principal and his sureties to recover money alleged to be due thereon. Plaintiff read in evidence, over the objection of defendants, an instrument in writing, signed by the principal, admitting that he was indebted to the plaintiff on the contract sued upon, the amount claimed in the suit. Held, that this instrument did not supersede the original obligation, but was merely an admission of the indebtedness sued for, and as such was competent evidence not only against the principal, but against his sureties also. [Abbott’s Trial Ev. 474; Brandt on Sure. & Guar. 656.]

Affirmed.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Portwood v. Wilburn
33 Tex. 713 (Texas Supreme Court, 1871)
Tullis v. Scott
38 Tex. 537 (Texas Supreme Court, 1873)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
2 Wilson 165, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/bates-v-j-f-evans-co-texapp-1884.