Kirksey v. Hilton Credit Corp.

Court of Appeals of Texas

Kirksey v. Hilton Credit Corp.

340 S.W.2d 565, 1960 Tex. App. LEXIS 1779

CourtCourt of Appeals of Texas

DecidedNovember 10, 1960

DocketNo. 3799

StatusPublished

This text of 340 S.W.2d 565 (Kirksey v. Hilton Credit Corp.) 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

Kirksey v. Hilton Credit Corp., 340 S.W.2d 565, 1960 Tex. App. LEXIS 1779 (Tex. Ct. App. 1960).

Pincite

Opinion

WILSON, Justice.

Appeal from order overruling pleas of privilege in an action for debt. One nonresident defendant filed an answer. Appel-lee controverted appellants’ pleas of privilege by pleading the provisions of Subd. 29a of Art. 1995, Vernon’s Ann.Civ.Stats., and alleging that the suit was properly maintainable in the county of suit against one defendant, and appellants were necessary parties to the action.

Appellants say there is nothing in the record to show they were necessary parties. We find nothing. Appellee had the burden of establishing this venue fact by independent evidence. Allegations in the petition alone (even if it had been made a part of the controverting plea) would not [566]*566establish this essential venue fact. Ladner v. Reliance Corp., 156 Tex. 158, 293 S.W.2d 758.

Judgment is reversed and here rendered sustaining the pleas of appellants, and the cause as to them is ordered transferred. Appellee’s motion to strike brief is overruled.

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

WILSON, Justice.

Appeal from order overruling pleas of privilege in an action for debt. One nonresident defendant filed an answer. Appel-lee controverted appellants’ pleas of privilege by pleading the provisions of Subd. 29a of Art. 1995, Vernon’s Ann.Civ.Stats., and alleging that the suit was properly maintainable in the county of suit against one defendant, and appellants were necessary parties to the action.

Appellants say there is nothing in the record to show they were necessary parties. We find nothing. Appellee had the burden of establishing this venue fact by independent evidence. Allegations in the petition alone (even if it had been made a part of the controverting plea) would not [566]*566establish this essential venue fact. Ladner v. Reliance Corp., 156 Tex. 158, 293 S.W.2d 758.

Judgment is reversed and here rendered sustaining the pleas of appellants, and the cause as to them is ordered transferred. Appellee’s motion to strike brief is overruled.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

340 S.W.2d 565, 1960 Tex. App. LEXIS 1779, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/kirksey-v-hilton-credit-corp-texapp-1960.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack