Case ID: tex_11/html/0692-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Lipscomb, J.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Thatcher v. R. & D. G. Mills.
    Where the defendant pleaded several pleas of confession and avoidance and also a general denial, and there was a statement of facts which purported to contain all the evidence, the Court reversed the judgment for the plaintiff, on the ground that it did not appear that the draft, sued on, had been given in evidence, nor its absence accounted for.
    Appeal from Wharton. Suit by the appellees on a draft drawn by the appellant on L. J. Latham to the order of B. & W. Milburn, and indorsed to the appellees. The defendant filed an answer which contained several pleas in confession and avoidance, and concluded with a general denial. There was a statement of facts; and it did not appear therefrom that the draft had been given in evidence, nor that its absence was accounted for.
    
      W Field, for appellant.
    
      G. Quinan, for appellees.
   Lipscomb, J.

It is assigned for error, that the draft on which this suit was instituted, was not given in evidence, nor was its absence accounted for.

If there had not been a full statement of the facts in this case, agreed on by the counsel for the plaintiff and the defendant, we would have presumed that the draft, upon which suit was brought, was read in evidence; as a judgment is entitled to every presumption in its favor. But where there is a statement of the evidence, agreed on, there is no room for such a presumption ; and a verdict rendered without it, or its absence accounted for, ought to have been set aside, and a new trial granted. For this error the judgment must be reversed and the cause remanded.

Reversed and remanded.