Boaz, Marklee & Co. v. Paddock

1 White & W. 21
CourtCourt of Appeals of Texas
DecidedMay 7, 1877
DocketNo. 364, Op. Book No. 1, p. 257
StatusPublished

This text of 1 White & W. 21 (Boaz, Marklee & Co. v. Paddock) 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
Boaz, Marklee & Co. v. Paddock, 1 White & W. 21 (Tex. Ct. App. 1877).

Opinion

Opinion by

White, J.

§ 39. Defective service in justice’s court. On appeal from a justice’s to the county court, it is error for the latter court to dismiss the case because of defective service in the justice’s court. In the county court the trial is de novo, and the want of proper citation and service would not authorize a dismissal of the suit. [Sheldon v. City of San Antonio, 25 Tex. Sup. 177.]

§ 40. Trial de novo. A meritorious defense could be as available on the trial de novo in the district or county court „as before the justice. If there be such defense, relief can be had without remanding the cause. [Perry v. Rhode, 20 Tex. 729.] .

Reversed and remanded.

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

Related

Perry v. Rohde
20 Tex. 729 (Texas Supreme Court, 1858)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
1 White & W. 21, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/boaz-marklee-co-v-paddock-texapp-1877.