Price v. Likens

23 Tex. 635
Texas Supreme Court·Decided July 1, 1859·Published·Cited by 3 cases

Opinion

Roberts, J.

This case was reversed and remanded, at a former term of this court, because the death of the original plaintiff, Keith, had been suggested, and no representative of his estate had appeared, or been made a party in court, to contest the claim of the intervenors, L. M. Wiley & Co. It now appears, that an administrator of his estate has made an appearance, and judgment has been rendered on the note, in favor of the intervenors, L. M. Wiley & Co., who claim to be the real owners. The administrator makes no objection to it, and there is no statement of facts, showing any error in the proceeding upon the merits.

After the parties announced themselves ready for trial, the plaintiffs made a motion to amend the record nunc fro tunc, so as to show that the administrator had previously made himself a party, which was granted, and the correction made. This, at [637]*637most, was but an irregularity, and it was within the discretion of the court, to permit it then to be done.

The bill of exceptions does not exhibit any error in the manner in which this was done. The motion was sustained by the minutes made on the judge’s docket, supported by the testimony of a witness. To this we see no objection.

Judgment affirmed.

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

Price v. Likens, 23 Tex. 635 (Tex. 1859).

23 Tex. 635 (Price v. Likens) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Dowdle v. United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co.
242 S.W. 771 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1922)
Camoron v. Thurmond
56 Tex. 22 (Texas Supreme Court, 1881)
Baldridge v. Scott
48 Tex. 178 (Texas Supreme Court, 1877)