Gillies v. Wofford

26 Tex. 76
CourtTexas Supreme Court
DecidedJuly 1, 1861
StatusPublished
Cited by9 cases

This text of 26 Tex. 76 (Gillies v. Wofford) 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
Gillies v. Wofford, 26 Tex. 76 (Tex. 1861).

Opinion

Bell, J.

We are of opinion that the court below erred in permitting evidence of the value of the wagon and oxen to go to the jury against the objection of the counsel for the defendant, when there was no allegation of value in the plaintiff’s petition. It is contended that the affidavit of the plaintiff below, made for the purpose of obtaining the writ of sequestration, and also the replevin bond executed by the defendant below, may be looked to as equivalent to an allegation of value in the petition, and as authorizing the introduction of evidence of value, but we are not able to perceive the force of the argument.

It is also insisted, or at least asserted, that the want of an averment of value in the petition is cured by verdict, and we are cited to the case of Carter and Hunt v. Wallace, 2d Tex., 206. It ig true that the case referred to is an authority for the proposition that the want of an allegation of value in the petition is cured by verdict, but that is only so where the evidence of value is received without objection.

We are also of opinion that the court below erred in the instruction given to the jury in relation to the measure of damages. The [78]*78true rule of damages was pointed out in the 4th instruction asked by the counsel for the defendant below—that is to say, the measure of damages was the value of the property and interest from the time of the conversion.

Because of these errors, the' judgment of the court below is reversed and the cause remanded.

Reversed and remanded.

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

Related

Brown v. Peters
94 S.W.2d 129 (Texas Supreme Court, 1936)
Rogers v. Irwin
60 S.W.2d 192 (Texas Commission of Appeals, 1933)
Ray v. Barrington
297 S.W. 781 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1927)
Evans v. Evans
249 S.W. 1097 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1923)
Endel v. Norris
39 S.W. 608 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1897)
Hull v. Davidson
25 S.W. 1047 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1894)
Johnson v. Dowling
1 White & W. 615 (Texas Commission of Appeals, 1881)
Stell v. Paschal
41 Tex. 640 (Texas Supreme Court, 1874)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
26 Tex. 76, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/gillies-v-wofford-tex-1861.