Harper v. Kelley

1 White & W. 17
CourtCourt of Appeals of Texas
DecidedApril 23, 1877
DocketNo. 97, Op. Book No. 1, p. 231
StatusPublished

This text of 1 White & W. 17 (Harper v. Kelley) 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
Harper v. Kelley, 1 White & W. 17 (Tex. Ct. App. 1877).

Opinion

Opinion by

Ector, P. J.

§ 21. Suggestion of delay, effect of. The effect of a suggestion of delay by appellee on appeal is to open up the entire record, and requires a reversal of the judgment for any error apparent upon the face of it.

§ 22. Parol evidence,■ when admissible to vary written instrument. While, as a general rule, verbal evidence is not admissible to contradict or alter a written instrument, this rule does not exclude such evidence when it is introduced to prove that the written agreement is totally discharged. Neither is this rule infringed by the admission of oral evidence to prove a new and distinct agreement upon a new consideration, whether it be a substitute for the old or in addition to and beyond it. And if subsequent, and involving the same subject matter, it is immaterial whether the new agreement be entirely oral or whether it refer to and ¡martially or totally adopts the provisions of the former contract in writing, provided the old agreement be abandoned and rescinded. [Hogan v. Crawford, 31 Tex. 635; Smith v. Garrett, 29 Tex. 48; 1 Greenl. Ev. §§ 303, 304.]

Reversed and remanded.

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

Related

Smith v. Garrett
29 Tex. 48 (Texas Supreme Court, 1867)
Hogan v. Crawford
31 Tex. 633 (Texas Supreme Court, 1869)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
1 White & W. 17, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/harper-v-kelley-texapp-1877.