Crockett v. Shaw

Texas Supreme Court

Crockett v. Shaw

29 Tex. 507

DecidedJuly 1, 1866

StatusPublished

This text of 29 Tex. 507 (Crockett v. Shaw) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Texas Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Crockett v. Shaw, 29 Tex. 507 (Tex. 1866).

Pincite

Opinion

Coke, J.

We are of opinion that there is no error in the judgment of the court below. The sufficiency of the defense relied on, setting up a parol agreement contemporaneous "and inconsistent with the written contract of indorsement, if it had been excepted to, might well have been questioned. The plaintiffs in error, however, were allowed an opportunity of proving it, and failed.

Judgment was properly rendered against them, and it is affirmed with damages for the delay.

Affirmed with damages.

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

Coke, J.

We are of opinion that there is no error in the judgment of the court below. The sufficiency of the defense relied on, setting up a parol agreement contemporaneous "and inconsistent with the written contract of indorsement, if it had been excepted to, might well have been questioned. The plaintiffs in error, however, were allowed an opportunity of proving it, and failed.

Judgment was properly rendered against them, and it is affirmed with damages for the delay.

Affirmed with damages.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

29 Tex. 507, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/crockett-v-shaw-tex-1866.