Phillips v. Patillo
This text of 18 Tex. 518 (Phillips v. Patillo) 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.
Opinion
The answer contained matters of defence to the action, which were well pleaded ; and there was error in [521]*521sustaining the plaintiffs’ exception. (Sterrett v. Houston, 14 Tex. R. 163; Alexander’s Dig. Tit. “Reconvention.”)
It was no ground for striking out the amended answer, that the plaintiffs had announced themselves ready for trial. The amendment contained no new matter which was calculated to take the plaintiffs by surprise ; it would not have operated to delay the trial; and whether necessary or not, it was not improper or liable to objection.
The judgment is reversed and the cause remanded.,
Reversed and remanded.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
18 Tex. 518, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/phillips-v-patillo-tex-1857.