Hubbard v. Bates

28 S.W.2d 843, 1930 Tex. App. LEXIS 531
CourtCourt of Appeals of Texas
DecidedMay 1, 1930
DocketNo. 2389.
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 28 S.W.2d 843 (Hubbard v. Bates) 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
Hubbard v. Bates, 28 S.W.2d 843, 1930 Tex. App. LEXIS 531 (Tex. Ct. App. 1930).

Opinion

HIGGINS, J.

Appellee sued appellant to recover a balance of $502.24 alleged to be due upon open account for goods, wares, and merchandise sold and delivered. xUppellant claimed certain payments had been made for which credit-had not been allowed. Verdict was returned and judgment rendered in plaintiff’s favor for the amount sued for.

On cross-examination, the defendant testified:

*844 “That he purchased approximately $3,700.-00 of stuff from Mr. Bates, and had paid him $2,430.35. That as to the amountl paid Bates his First Original Answer shows $2,430.35 and that this is correct.
“That hei was not certain that Bates had failed to credit him with any payments not shown in the account introduced in evidence.”

This testimony is not otherwise explained or contradicted. According to his own testimony, defendant owes much more than the plaintiff claims. In .view of.this testimony, the errors assigned are harmless. A peremptory charge in the plaintiff’s favor should have been given.

Affirmed.

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

Related

Williams v. Rodocker
84 S.W.2d 556 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1935)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
28 S.W.2d 843, 1930 Tex. App. LEXIS 531, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hubbard-v-bates-texapp-1930.