Morrison v. Van Bibber

Texas Supreme Court
Morrison v. Van Bibber, 25 Tex. 153 (Tex. 1860)
Roberts

Morrison v. Van Bibber

Opinion of the Court

Roberts, J.

—This suit was founded on the note and mortgage. The defendant below having been served with process, and failing to appear and answer, a judgment by default was taken, a writ of inquiry awarded, and the jury returned their verdict: “We, the jury, find for the plain*154tiff the amount of the note sued on, and that the note is the same as described in the mortgage.” Upon which a judgment was rendered for the amount of the note, and foreclosure of the mortgage.

The default determined the facts alleged in favor of the 'plaintiff; and, as there were no unliquidated damages to be assessed, there was really no need for a writ of inquiry. This case is therefore entirely unlike the ease of May v. Taylor, 22 Tex. 349, in which there was an issue made up, and a regular trial of the cause by both parties before the court and jury.

The judgment is correct, and is affirmed with damages.

Judgment aeeirmed with damages.

Reference

Full Case Name
Wesley Morrison v. John Van Bibber
Status
Published
Syllabus
In a suit to foreclose a mortgage the defendant made default, and upon writ of inquiry the jury returned a verdict: “We, the jury, find for the plaintiff the amount of the note sued on, and that the note is the same as described in the mortgageHeld, that the judgment for the amount and foreclosure was correct. (Paschal’s Dig., Art. 1508, Note 594.) There was no necessity of a writ of inquiry.