Tryon v. Butler

9 Tex. 553
Texas Supreme Court·Decided July 1, 1853·Published·Cited by 10 cases

Opinion

Wheeler, J.

Our opinion in the case of Tousey v. Butler et al. [ante) meets the objections to the judgment in this ease as to the defendant Tousey. And as a misnomer of. parties must always be' pleaded in abatement, or the right to (he exception is lost, (1 Mass. R., 76; 5 Id., 97; 10 Id., 205; 16 Id., 146; 6 Munf. R., 219; 4 Cow. R., 148; 10 S. & R., 257,) the other defendant, Tryon, can bo in no better condition than his co-defendant, in consequence of having suffered judgment to go against him by default. Even if the petition had not been amended, this defendant, not having pleaded the misnomer in abatement, could not take advantage of it on error. The amendment having been properly allowed, cannot afford a ground for reversing the judgment.

Judgment affrmed.

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

Tryon v. Butler, 9 Tex. 553 (Tex. 1853).

9 Tex. 553 (Tryon v. Butler) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Rogers v. Barbee
359 S.W.2d 101 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1962)
Adams v. Consolidated Underwriters
124 S.W.2d 840 (Texas Supreme Court, 1939)
Presley v. Wilson
125 S.W.2d 654 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1939)
Rogers v. Allen
80 S.W.2d 1085 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1935)
Brockman v. Echols
22 S.W.2d 686 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1929)
Abilene Independent Telephone & Telegraph Co. v. Williams
229 S.W. 847 (Texas Supreme Court, 1921)
Williams v. Abilene Independent Telephone & Telegraph Co.
168 S.W. 402 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1914)
Faver v. Robinson
46 Tex. 204 (Texas Supreme Court, 1876)
Halleck v. Guy
9 Cal. 181 (California Supreme Court, 1858)