Goodgame v. Rushing

35 Tex. 722
Texas Supreme Court·Decided July 1, 1872·Published·Cited by 9 cases

Opinion

Walker, J.

In this case the court instructed the jury as follows, to-wit:—“The defendant’s intestate, being the trustee of the plaintiff for the sale of the property under a chattel mortgage, had no right to bid off the property himself, and a sale made to himself upon such a bid was void, and vested no title to the property in him.”

This is not the law in this State. (See 6 Texas Reports, p. 174, Howard v. Davis; E. B. Scott v. T. W. Mann and others, opinion delivered at the last term of trie court, 33 Texas, 735; 10 Johnson, 185.) It is deemed unnecessary to refer to other authorities; the court misdirected the jury.

The judgment 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

Goodgame v. Rushing, 35 Tex. 722 (Tex. 1872).

35 Tex. 722 (Goodgame v. Rushing) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

McLean v. Hargrove
162 S.W.2d 954 (Texas Supreme Court, 1942)
Newton v. L. W. Culver Storage & Transfer Co.
157 S.W.2d 656 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1941)
Kaiser v. Hutcheson
112 S.W.2d 1058 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1937)
Heiner v. Homeland Realty Co.
100 S.W.2d 793 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1936)
Swineford v. Virginia Trust Co.
152 S.E. 350 (Supreme Court of Virginia, 1930)
Thornton v. Goodman
216 S.W. 147 (Texas Supreme Court, 1919)
Randolph v. Allen
73 F. 23 (Fifth Circuit, 1896)
Allen v. Gillette
127 U.S. 589 (Supreme Court, 1888)