Mathews v. Hancock

Texas Supreme Court

Mathews v. Hancock

20 Tex. 6

DecidedJuly 1, 1857

StatusPublished

This text of 20 Tex. 6 (Mathews v. Hancock) 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.

Bluebook

Mathews v. Hancock, 20 Tex. 6 (Tex. 1857).

Pincite

Opinion

Roberts, J.

Defendant in error recovered a judgment on a note bearing twelve per cent, interest, and the judgment is rendered so as to bear only eight per cent, interest. The judgment is shown to be excessive in the sum of eighteen yVw dollars, which has been remitted by defendant in error.

[7]*7The judgment will be reversed and reformed at cost of defendant, so as to specify the correct amount after deducting said excess, and to bear interest in accordance with the note at the rate of twelve per cent, per annum from the date of the judgment below. (McNairy v. Castleberry, 6 Tex. R. 286; Jewett v. Thompson, 8 Id. 437.)

Judgment reformed.

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

Roberts, J.

Defendant in error recovered a judgment on a note bearing twelve per cent, interest, and the judgment is rendered so as to bear only eight per cent, interest. The judgment is shown to be excessive in the sum of eighteen yVw dollars, which has been remitted by defendant in error.

[7]*7The judgment will be reversed and reformed at cost of defendant, so as to specify the correct amount after deducting said excess, and to bear interest in accordance with the note at the rate of twelve per cent, per annum from the date of the judgment below. (McNairy v. Castleberry, 6 Tex. R. 286; Jewett v. Thompson, 8 Id. 437.)

Judgment reformed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

20 Tex. 6, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mathews-v-hancock-tex-1857.