Peters v. Texas Implement Co.

Court of Appeals of Texas

Peters v. Texas Implement Co.

286 S.W. 593, 1926 Tex. App. LEXIS 703, 1926 WL 3718

CourtCourt of Appeals of Texas

DecidedJune 17, 1926

DocketNo. 384.

StatusPublished

Cited by4 cases

This text of 286 S.W. 593 (Peters v. Texas Implement Co.) 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

Peters v. Texas Implement Co., 286 S.W. 593, 1926 Tex. App. LEXIS 703, 1926 WL 3718 (Tex. Ct. App. 1926).

Pincite

Opinion

BARCUS, J.

This suit was instituted by appellee to recover from appellant a balance of $490.15, including interest, for goods, wares, and merchandise which appellee sold and delivered to appellant. Appellant filed an answer, but on the trial of the cause to the jury offered no testimony in support of his defensive pleas. Appellee, by competent testimony, established 'its cause of action, and the jury returned a verdict for the amount sued for.

Appellant, based on his assignments of error, presents three propositions: First, that the court erred in not sustaining his general demurrer; second, that there was no pleading or testimony to support the jury’s finding as to the item of interest; and, third, that there was no evidence to support the jury’s finding that appellee sold the goods. We have examined all these and do not think any of them show reversible error. The petition was full and complete and attached thereto and made a part thereof was an itemized statement of the account showing an item of interest figured to April, 1924, for which judgment was asked. E. H. Buie,' who was the manager of appellee, a corporation, testified that the account included interest to April 21, 1924; that the account was just, due, and unpaid; that the charges for the merchandise are reasonable; and that he sold same to appellant. This testimony was undisputed and supports the judgment.

The judgment of the trial court is affirmed.

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

BARCUS, J.

This suit was instituted by appellee to recover from appellant a balance of $490.15, including interest, for goods, wares, and merchandise which appellee sold and delivered to appellant. Appellant filed an answer, but on the trial of the cause to the jury offered no testimony in support of his defensive pleas. Appellee, by competent testimony, established 'its cause of action, and the jury returned a verdict for the amount sued for.

Appellant, based on his assignments of error, presents three propositions: First, that the court erred in not sustaining his general demurrer; second, that there was no pleading or testimony to support the jury’s finding as to the item of interest; and, third, that there was no evidence to support the jury’s finding that appellee sold the goods. We have examined all these and do not think any of them show reversible error. The petition was full and complete and attached thereto and made a part thereof was an itemized statement of the account showing an item of interest figured to April, 1924, for which judgment was asked. E. H. Buie,' who was the manager of appellee, a corporation, testified that the account included interest to April 21, 1924; that the account was just, due, and unpaid; that the charges for the merchandise are reasonable; and that he sold same to appellant. This testimony was undisputed and supports the judgment.

The judgment of the trial court is affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

286 S.W. 593, 1926 Tex. App. LEXIS 703, 1926 WL 3718, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/peters-v-texas-implement-co-texapp-1926.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack