Swift & Co. v. Short

Court of Appeals of Texas

Swift & Co. v. Short

239 S.W. 1118, 1922 Tex. App. LEXIS 650

CourtCourt of Appeals of Texas

DecidedApril 26, 1922

DocketNo. 6745.

StatusPublished

This text of 239 S.W. 1118 (Swift & Co. v. Short) 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

Swift & Co. v. Short, 239 S.W. 1118, 1922 Tex. App. LEXIS 650 (Tex. Ct. App. 1922).

Pincite

Opinion

ELY, Ci J.

This is a suit on an open account, for $211.59, alleged to be . due by ap-pellee to appellant for certain meats and groceries furnished by appellant to appellee as a member of the partnership of Harmon & Short. It was alleged that the residence of Harmon was unknown and that he was utterly insolvent. Judgment was sought against appellee as a member of the firm. Appellee denied that he had ever been a partner with Harmon. After hearing the testimony, the court instructed a verdict for appellee.

There was testimony tending to show that appellee was a member of the firm of Harmon & Short, and that the firm bought the goods from appellant. The court therefore erred in taking the ease from the jury. In view of another trial, we will not discuss the facts, which raised issues that should have gone to the jury.

The judgment is reversed, and the cause remanded.

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

ELY, Ci J.

This is a suit on an open account, for $211.59, alleged to be . due by ap-pellee to appellant for certain meats and groceries furnished by appellant to appellee as a member of the partnership of Harmon & Short. It was alleged that the residence of Harmon was unknown and that he was utterly insolvent. Judgment was sought against appellee as a member of the firm. Appellee denied that he had ever been a partner with Harmon. After hearing the testimony, the court instructed a verdict for appellee.

There was testimony tending to show that appellee was a member of the firm of Harmon & Short, and that the firm bought the goods from appellant. The court therefore erred in taking the ease from the jury. In view of another trial, we will not discuss the facts, which raised issues that should have gone to the jury.

The judgment is reversed, and the cause remanded.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

239 S.W. 1118, 1922 Tex. App. LEXIS 650, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/swift-co-v-short-texapp-1922.