Case Name: ROBINSON v. HILL
Court: Texas Courts of Civil Appeals
Jurisdiction: Texas
Decision Date: 1917-03-22
Citations: 193 S.W. 1082
Docket Number: No. 678
Parties: ROBINSON v. HILL.
Judges: 
Reporter: South Western Reporter
Volume: 193
Pages: 1082–1082

Head Matter:
ROBINSON v. HILL.
(No. 678.)
(Court of Civil Appeals of Texas. El Paso.
March 22, 1917.)
Appeal and Error &wkey;W73(4) — Briefs—Af-firmance ON FAILURE TO FILE.
Where appellant files no briefs but appellee does, the judgment will be affirmed when the record discloses no fundamental error.
[Ed. Note. — For other cases, see Appeal and Error, Cent. Dig. §§ 3104, 3109.]
Appeal from District Court, Midland County ; 8. J. Tsaacks, Judge.
Action by J. W. Robinson against J. E. Hill. Judgment for defendant, and plaintiff appeals.
Affirmed.
Jno. B. Howard, of Pecos, and M. D. Brown, of Quanah, for appellant. Chas. Gibbs, of Midland, and Earl Anderson, of El Paso, for appellee.

Opinion:
HARPER, C. J.
Appellant bought 100 mares from appellee, and gave his note, in the sum of $6,400, as purchase money therefor. He also borrowed $100 in cash, and gave his note therefor. These notes were secured by a chattel mortgage upon the said mares and upon three jacks, as additional security. The $100 note fell due on November 1, 1914, and the $6,400 note fell due on December 1, 1915. The chattel mortgage provided that failure to pay the $100 note when due should mature the $6,400 note. Appellant defaulted in the payment of said $100 note, and the other note was declared due, and the property was sold under the mortgage, on June 1, 1915. This suit was brought by appeliant against appellee for damages alleged to have accrued to appellant by reason of said sale, appellant alleging that said sale was unauthorized and void, and that appellee had converted said mares and two of said jacks to his own use, and sued for the value thereof. Appellee answered by general denial, and, in the alternative, sued for the principal, interest, and attorney's fees on the notes, and also for certain items of expense alleged to have .accrued to appellee in taking care of the mares and jacks prior to the date of the sale in question. Appellee prayed that these items be offset against any judgment that might be rendered in favor of appellant. Tried with jury. Verdict and judgment for appellee, from which this appeal is prosecuted.
The appellant has filed no briefs, and, the appellee having filed his brief asking that the judgment be affirmed, we have examined the record for fundamental error, and, none being apparent, the judgment of the lower court is affirmed.
©n»For otter cases see same topic and KEY-NUMBER in all Key-Numbered Digests and Indexes