Gerald v. Burthee

Texas Supreme Court
Gerald v. Burthee, 29 Tex. 202 (Tex. 1867)
Willie

Gerald v. Burthee

Opinion of the Court

Willie, J.

This was a suit commenced below by defendants in error against plaintiffs in error upon a promissory note. Service was accepted by indorsement on the petition more than five days before the commencement of the court, and on the fifth day of the term the petition was filed, and the plaintiffs in error confessed judgment for the full amount claimed in it. The case is now brought to this court by writ of error, and it is assigned, among other things, that the court erred in permitting a judgment by confession to be entered up without process, and *204without an affidavit having heen made as to the justness of the debt.

In the case of Flanagan v. Bruner, 10 Tex., 257, it was held, that if a defendant appear under process and confess judgment, the Judgment will be valid, whether there be an affidavit or not. That the statute, (O. & W. Dig., Art. 499,) when referring to appearance without process, meant without service of process; and that a waiver or acceptance is by law as effectual as actual service.

There was an acceptance of service in this case which took it out óf the requirements of the statute as to swearing to the justness of the debt, and the court did not err in permitting the judgment to be rendered without such affidavit. The judgment is

Aeeirmed.

Reference

Full Case Name
Gerald & McGee v. Burthee & Higgins
Cited By
2 cases
Status
Published
Syllabus
Where a party acknowledged service under the 13th section of the act to regulate proceedings in the district court over five days before the term, but the petition was not filed and the case docketed until the fifth day of the term, it was not error to enter judgment at the same term. (Paschal’s Dig., Art. 1433, Note 545.) Where service had been acknowledged and the case docketed, and the defendant confessed judgment, without the affidavit of the plaintiff to the justness of the debt, as required by the 116th section of the act to regulate proceedings in the district court, the judgment will not be reversed on error. (Paschal’s Dig., Art. 1477, Note 573.)