Fort Worth daily gazette. (Fort Worth, Tex.) 1882-1891, 1888-12-07

goods NaXHell secured Appellants
signature to the note snd secured the
goodg. Padgitt Bros. finding that the
note had been payable in eight
months, notified appellants that this
was not agreeable, and told them 70
make G note payable In ninety days. APP
pellarts replied refusing TO do go, and
asked for the return CT the note they had
Endorsed, pEysbls in eight months. Pad
gett Bros. replied that they could not do
this, having sold the note 10 appellee,
Hall. This suit is brought by ball agsinsE
Padgitt Bros Maxwell and appellants.
JuGgm mt for Hall sgainst ell parties,
Snd for P2dgltt Bros. sgsipst appellants
and Maxwell. Reid: In so far So appel
lsnts are concerned, the consideration Ct
the note failed snd they were not bound
upon It 10 Pldgitt Bros. aiterStns lister
had declined to scceps Its terms, and the
former had demanded its return to them.
Reversed and remanded. White, P. J.
Strauss liz Levy vs. Hernshuin Bros;
appeal from Dallas. l. Where . non
resident is served with citation in con.
formity with Art. 1880, ct Seq. R. g.,
such service has been held good by our
courts, and particularly where In cornec-
ton with such notice the suit be an &C
ton essentially in rem, bringing the
property, effec!s and credits OF the non
resident within the control of the court
By attachment or garnishment. The
court erred IN qusshing the notice and
service, and IN sustaining the plea to the
juris iic.ion. Reversed and ramanded.
Whit, P. j.
G1inesville Street Railway vs.. Ben Gir-
vey; appeal from Cooke. Suit by appel.
lee to 7, cover damages for Injuries suse
tanned oy mule, which fell while appel
lee WAS crossing appellants track and
was mi 1red. II is shown tha. the rail-
way Was not on level with the street SO
required by ordinance; that appellee Gid
not know whist csused the f Jat to over
turn, throwing the mule 10 the ground;
appellee saying that ne did not know tie
cause. There WaE evidence to show that
same was overturned by appellee IN en-
deayoring to make short turp. Held:
Tue evidence does not support the j1ig.
msEf. Reversed AID reminded. VIII
SOD, j.
A N. Afford vs.. N. A Matthews; sp-
peal from YarZindt. Silt by appellant
upon note given by sppelIee. Judg-
menG was taken by default, Appellant
made q motion for new trial, which
w&s oYerruled. In the molten for Few
GE!sl il Is AllaEad that tie ro<a was eye
cuted By appellant to big N o:Esr IN the
settlement & e pertrershir; that tf,er-
ward it Was discovered t1ss mistake
had been made in the settlement and the
note was returned - Sppellsnt by his
brother, /: being fou?d thst he cid
not owe his brother anything; Thai
afterwards, when the brother of sp-
pellsDt WAS drunk ne took the note out
OF appellants SAFE, and ia game Of csrds
appellee won the note from the brother OF
appellant-thst the reason this suit WAS
not defended when called WAS because OF
the sickness of s)9sIisnt's attorney-.hat
as soon as he fou I'd his attorney could not
represent him in t1e case, hs employed
another attorney End proceeded 10 The
courthouse, where it was found tbs.
jugdment by deiIllt had jus. b;en taken
sgsinst appellant. Held: The court
erred in overruling the m0tion tor new
trisl. Reversed sEd rsmsnded. Waite.
P. J.
Gainesville, Henrietta end Western
Railway VS.. WspleF, Painter & Co; ap-
peal from Cooke. suit by appellants for
condemnation OF right Of way Access the
lsrd Of appeliess. l. The nppellees sd
hitting the right CT appellants to have
the land condemned, but the Issue being
as to the amour! CT damages, the caurt
did not err IN holding thaS appellees had
the RICH. to zen End conclude the Case
2. The court did not er: in refusing TO let
the Jury view the land sought 10 be con-
demned. 8. The appellses were Fer
mitted, and rfghtfully, 70 show GER
"a ~ 40
depreciste in value. II Is competent
which would reasonably onset the market
permit sppellees TO prove the value of the
It amounted to the same thing IS saying
the aggregate value of the land was equsl
to the value OF the land and timber. No
reversible error. Affirmed. Wilson, j
John q. Triplett, ct al. vs. a. Le-
force; appeal from Montague. N,ne CT
the assignments of error are maintain
able. The evldei &c ie cuff ;iert and an
ply warrants the verdict and judgment CT
the court b3!o1. No materIsl error.
Affirmed. Wilson, J.
William Cameron VS.. Webb Hypds &
Co.; appeal from Collin. Suit By sppel-
ices 10 TeCUNSI OhlhLCe Gus Oh SDCuL
twenty carloads Of wheat delivered sp-
pellart by sppellees. Appellant lived II
McLenrsn and plead his privilege 10 be
sued in the county CT his resideIce. Yer
dict for sppellees. l. is shown that the
appellees In Offering 10 sell snd sppellsat
in accepting used the letters "F o g."
in this manner: ave Will sell YeGasr
cars of wheat F 0. B. at 65cFssd
1 will take ten cars F. o B. at65 '
II WAS proved over the objections of ~.
pellant that F. 0 g. mesu. "tHe ion
boacd the cars A. Mckinney" fronkwhch
point the wheIt was shipped; tha5aShere
WAS q custom among merchants tho .thes
seller has right TO the price st Nhe|
place where the goods ere placed m No
cars, snd thst the money By virtus ~
custom WAS ps7a5le az McKinneyssf
Appellant had TIE right to &c sted In the
county Of his residence. He insisted
upon this By proper plea. 2. The letters,
F. o B, meaning Stree on oosrd" does
not evidence = contract In writing to pay
at Mckinney. 8 The court erred in ad-
hitting evidence SO to the custom of
merchants, etc. The plea of privilege
should have been sustained. Reversed
sud dismissed. Hurt, j.
Bikuksnship & Blake va. G, A. Turner,
gsranshee; sppesl from Ellis. II appears