Wilson v. Ford

159 S.W. 73, 1913 Tex. App. LEXIS 1346
Court of Appeals of Texas·Decided May 17, 1913·Published·Cited by 7 cases

Opinion

DUNKLIN, J.

This is an appeal from a judgment rendered in favor of Henry Ford against defendant, J. D. Wilson, instituted' in the county court of Wichita county to recover upon certain promissory notes and for a foreclosure of chattel mortgage liens upon several horses and a crop of 150 acres of cotton.

[1] Neither the original nor the supplemental petition, which constituted the pleadings upon which plaintiff relied upon the trial, contains any allegation of the value of the-property upon which a foreclosure of lien was sought. According to the well-settled1 rule, if the value of this property exceeded the sum of $1,000, the county court had no' jurisdiction of plaintiff’s suit.

[2] In the absence of an affirmative showing of jurisdiction of the county court to' hear and determine the controversy, the judgment must be reversed, and the cause remanded; and it is so ordered. Ware v. Clark, 125 S. W. 618; Stricklin v. Arrington & Carter, 141 S. W. 189.

Reversed and remanded.

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

Wilson v. Ford, 159 S.W. 73, 1913 Tex. App. LEXIS 1346 (Tex. Ct. App. 1913).

159 S.W. 73 (Wilson v. Ford) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Tant v. Baldwin Piano Co.
217 S.W. 239 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1919)
People's Ice Co. v. Phariss
203 S.W. 66 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1918)
Bush v. Campbell
201 S.W. 1055 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1918)
Reeves v. Faris
186 S.W. 772 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1916)
Lusk v. Hardin
176 S.W. 787 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1915)
Richardson v. Hethcock
173 S.W. 1006 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1915)
Marshall v. G. A. Stowers Furniture Co.
167 S.W. 230 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1914)