Case ID: sw_201/html/1061-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "MOURSUND, J.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

WATTS et al. v. STEWART.
    (No. 5993.)
    (Court of Civil Appeals of Texas. San Antonio.
    March 13, 1918.)
    Courts <§=>170 — County Court — Amount in Controversy — Pleading.
    Where the petition in a suit on notes and for foreclosure of a chattel mortgage discloses that the sum sued for is less than $200, and contains no allegation of the value of the mortgaged property, the petition does not affirmatively allege facts showing that the county court has jurisdiction of the cause of action.
    Appeal from Bexar County Court for Civil Cases; Jno. H. Clark, Judge.
    Suit by Carrie B. Stewart against S. J. Watts and another. From a judgment for plaintiff, defendants appeal.
    Reversed, and cause remanded.
    McCollum Burnett, of San Antonio, for appellants.
   MOURSUND, J.

Carrie B. Stewart sued S. J. Watts and Israella D. Watts on August 23, 1917, for principal, interest, and attorneys’ fees due on six notes, the principal of which in the aggregate was $190, but which were credited with $35, and for foreclosure of a chattel mortgage lien on a Ford automobile, given to secure payment of said notes. Judgment was rendered in favor of plaintiff for $175.40.

The petition discloses that the sum sued for is less than $200, and contains no allegation of the value of the mortgaged property. It therefore appears that the petition does not affirmatively allege facts showing that the county court has jurisdiction of the cause of action. Reeves v. Faris, 186 S. W. 772; Marshall v. Stowers Furniture Co., 167 S. W. 230; Glasscock v. Sinks, 185 S. W. 405.

The judgment is reversed, and the cause remanded.