Smith v. Roberts

Court of Appeals of Texas

Smith v. Roberts

15 S.W. 126, 4 Willson 75

CourtCourt of Appeals of Texas

DecidedJanuary 25, 1890

DocketNo. 2763

StatusPublished

This text of 15 S.W. 126 (Smith v. Roberts) 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

Smith v. Roberts, 15 S.W. 126, 4 Willson 75 (Tex. Ct. App. 1890).

Pincite

Opinion

Opinion by

Willson, J.

[76]*76January 25, 1890.

§ 49. Verdict; uncertain, will not support judgment. Smith sued Roberts upon a promissory note, claiming a balance due of $749.98. Roberts pleaded failure of consideration, etc. The case was tried by the jury, and the following verdict rendered: “We, the jury, render verdict for the defendant, and allow plaintiff amount per month agreed upon between him and L. F. Roberts, and allow nothing for commissions.” Upon this verdict the court rendered judgment in favor of Smith for $900 and costs. We are of the opinion that the verdict is too uncertain and indefinite to support a judgment. It does not find the issues submitted. It is inconsistent in its findings. It finds first for the defendant and then finds for the plaintiff an indefinite amount. [Darden v. Mathews, 22 Tex. 320.]

Reversed and remanded.

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

Opinion by

Willson, J.

[76]*76January 25, 1890.

§ 49. Verdict; uncertain, will not support judgment. Smith sued Roberts upon a promissory note, claiming a balance due of $749.98. Roberts pleaded failure of consideration, etc. The case was tried by the jury, and the following verdict rendered: “We, the jury, render verdict for the defendant, and allow plaintiff amount per month agreed upon between him and L. F. Roberts, and allow nothing for commissions.” Upon this verdict the court rendered judgment in favor of Smith for $900 and costs. We are of the opinion that the verdict is too uncertain and indefinite to support a judgment. It does not find the issues submitted. It is inconsistent in its findings. It finds first for the defendant and then finds for the plaintiff an indefinite amount. [Darden v. Mathews, 22 Tex. 320.]

Reversed and remanded.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

15 S.W. 126, 4 Willson 75, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/smith-v-roberts-texapp-1890.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack