Hays v. Yarborough
This text of 21 Tex. 487 (Hays v. Yarborough) 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.
Opinion
The petition states the names of the plaintiffs in full, and the judgment reads: “ This day came the party plaintiffs, by their attorneys,” &c.; and further on, “considered by the Court that plaintiffs Yarborough & Ferguson do have and recover,” &c., meaning the same Yarborough & Ferguson, without repeating their given names, who had been mentioned as plaintiffs in the petition.
It would be better in rendering a judgment to avoid all' such abbreviations ; still it is not perceived that we can determine that it is error in this case. It is believed to be a very common practice so to render judgments in our Courts. It is admitted on the authority of Collins & Co. v. Hyslop & Son, (11 Ala. R. 508,) that had the word “ plaintiffs ” been used without being in connection with “ Yarborough & Ferguson,” that it would have been good, as it would then certainly refer to the plaintiffs, whose full names are set out in the petition. We cannot see that by mentioning a part of each one of the plaintiffs’ names, as “ Yarborough & Ferguson,” that it any less certainly refers to the plaintiffs named in the petition. Judgment affirmed with damages ten per cent,.
Affirmed with damages.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
21 Tex. 487, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hays-v-yarborough-tex-1858.