Moore v. Fay

15 S.W. 199, 4 Willson 298
Court of Appeals of Texas·Decided January 14, 1891·No. No. 2987·Published·Cited by 3 cases

Opinion

Opinion by

White, P. J.

§ 199. Jurisdiction of comity court; amount in controversy; .case stated. Suit upon a promissory note for $910.64, which note contains a stipulation that if it was not paid at maturity, ten per cent, for attorney’s fees for collection should be added to the principal should the [299] note be placed in the hands of an attorney for collection. The petition claimed and prayed for a judgment for the principal of the note, interest and the stipulated attorney’s fees. The ten per cent, attorney’s fees added to the principal makes $1,001.70, an amount in excess of the jurisdiction of the county court, said jurisdiction being limited to not exceed $1,000 exclusive of interest. [Const., art. 5, § 16; 1 App. C. C., § 598.] The attorney’s fee was „a part of the debt to be paid, and constituted a part of the amount in controversy in the suit. [2 App. C. C., § 556.]

January 14, 1891.

Reversed and the suit ordered to be dismissed.

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

Moore v. Fay, 15 S.W. 199, 4 Willson 298 (Tex. Ct. App. 1891).

15 S.W. 199 (Moore v. Fay) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Eanes v. Haynes
135 S.W.2d 190 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1939)
Belle Springs Creamery Co. v. Marshall
165 S.W. 61 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1914)
Humphrey v. Coquillard Wagon Works
1913 OK 441 (Supreme Court of Oklahoma, 1913)