Case ID: sw2d_16/html/0324-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "WILLSON, C. J.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

W. C. BIGGERS & CO. v. FARMERS’ & MERCHANTS’ NAT. BANK.
    (No. 3681.)
    Court of Civil Appeals of Texas. Texarkana.
    April 6, 1929.
    Rehearing Denied April 11, 1929.
    Tom Whipple, of Waxahachie, and Thos. R. Bond, of Terrell, for appellant.
    Wynne & Wynne and Nestor Morrow, all of Kaufman, for appellee.
   WILLSON, C. J.

(after stating the case as above). The question on the record on this appeal is: Was the acceptance by W. C. Biggers & Co. of drafts drawn on them “at the Farmers’ & Merchants’ National Bank, Kaufman, Texas,” an undertaking by them to pay the drafts at that bank? If it was, then appellee had a right to sue on the acceptances in Kaufman county as it did by force of the provision in the statute (article 1995, exception 5, R. S. 1925) permitting a defendant to be sued in another county than the one he resides in, when he has contracted in writing “to perform an obligation in a particular county.”

If the holding of the court in Yett v. Green, 39 Tex. Civ. App. 184, 86 S. W. 787, is followed — and we see no reason why it should not be — the question should be answered in the affirmative. In that case the defendant, who resided in Coleman county, accepted a draft drawn on him at “Robert Lee, c/o Bank at Robert Lee,” which is in Coke county. In reversing a judgment sustaining the defendant’s “plea of. privilege” to be sued in Coleman county, where he resided, the court, citing authorities, said: “According to these authorities, inasmuch as the draft was addressed to the defendant at Robert Lee, which is a town in Coke County, and was accepted by him in general terms, and not by a qualified acceptance, we - conclude that it was the intention of the parties in making the contract that the debt should be paid in Coke County.”

The judgment is affirmed.