McDonald v. Holt

1 White & W. 567
Texas Commission of Appeals·Decided February 23, 1881·No. No. 1294, Op. Book No. 2, p. 230·Published

Opinion

Opinion by

Watts, J.

§ 1014. Surety; where he appears as joint maker. It is well settled that one of several joint promisors, not signing as a surety, cannot plead that he is a surety for the purpose of requiring the alleged principal to be jointly or simultaneously sued. [Lewis v. Riggs, 9 Tex. 164; Ritter v. Hamilton, 4 Tex. 325; Ennis & Reynolds v. Crump, 6 Tex. 85.]

§1015. Conclusions of court upon the facts. When the cause is tried by the judge alone, his conclusions upon the facts are entitled to the same weight as the finding of a jury, and where the evidence is conflicting it will not be disturbed. [Bailey v. White, 13 Tex. 114.]

Affirmed.

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

McDonald v. Holt, 1 White & W. 567 (Tex. Super. Ct. 1881).

1 White & W. 567 (McDonald v. Holt) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Ennis v. Crump
6 Tex. 85 (Texas Supreme Court, 1851)
Lewis v. Riggs
9 Tex. 164 (Texas Supreme Court, 1852)
Bailey's Adm'r v. White
13 Tex. 114 (Texas Supreme Court, 1854)