Reed v. Roark

14 Tex. 329
CourtTexas Supreme Court
DecidedJuly 1, 1855
StatusPublished
Cited by11 cases

This text of 14 Tex. 329 (Reed v. Roark) 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.

Bluebook
Reed v. Roark, 14 Tex. 329 (Tex. 1855).

Opinion

Wheeler, J.

The defendant pleaded, under oath, admitting the making of the note in pencil, but denying the making of it by writing with ink. The Court sustained exceptions to the plea. A note in pencil is valid while legible. (Chit. on Bills, 126-7.) It is not averred that the note in question had become illegible; and there can be no such intendment in favor of the plea. The note, being admitted to have been made in pencil, is to be taken to have been a valid note ; and there being no other alteration than the making in ink what was before in pencil, that was not an alteration of the note in any material part. It did not vary its legal effect. An alteration in any part of a bill or note which is not material, though without •consent, will not invalidate it. An alteration which does not vary the meaning of an instrument will not avoid it, though made by a party claiming under it. (Id. 184, n.) The alleged alteration, therefore, from pencil to ink, did not invalidate the note, even if made without the authorization or consent of the defendant. But it is not averred that it was not made by his authority or with his consent. The plea, therefore, was rightly adjudged insufficient; and the judgment is affirmed.

Judgment affirmed.

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

Related

Reliance Insurance Co. v. Dahlstrom Corp.
568 S.W.2d 733 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1978)
American Savings & Loan Ass'n of Houston v. Musick
531 S.W.2d 581 (Texas Supreme Court, 1975)
Hester v. Ross
492 S.W.2d 378 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1973)
Oehler v. Scammel
242 S.W.2d 403 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1951)
Elder Mfg. Co. v. Leader, Inc.
25 S.W.2d 274 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1929)
Anderson v. Foglesong
207 N.W. 562 (Supreme Court of Iowa, 1926)
Craig v. Wismar
141 N.E. 766 (Illinois Supreme Court, 1923)
Citizens State Bank v. Johnson County
207 S.W. 8 (Court of Appeals of Kentucky, 1918)
Franklin v. Tiernan
56 Tex. 618 (Texas Supreme Court, 1882)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
14 Tex. 329, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/reed-v-roark-tex-1855.