Reese v. Teagarden

Texas Supreme Court
Reese v. Teagarden, 31 Tex. 642 (Tex. 1869)
Morrill

Reese v. Teagarden

Opinion of the Court

Morrill, C. J.

—Plaintiff sued defendants upon anote for $172 00 and interest, and attached properly of defendants. Defendants pleaded that plaintiff obtained the note after it became due, and that the payee and assignor of the note was' indebted to them in the sum of say $500, and reconvened, asking damages for the attachment wrongfully sued out.

The jury found for the defendants $290 62 and $10 damages.

The judge charged the jury that if the payee of the note was indebted to defendant by account, and that the note *643came into the hands of the plaintiff after the maturity of the note, then they would allow the defendant whatever amount he had proved to be due him on account.

The charge was erroneous, and this erroneous charge caused a verdict equally erroneous.

The error of the charge is so apparent, that anything we can add will not make it appear more apparent.

Reversed and remanded.

Reference

Full Case Name
Sarah Reese v. O. Teagarden
Status
Published
Syllabus
Where the defendant is sued upon a negotiable note, he cannot plead in re-convention, and recover against the holder the balance of an open account against the original payee of the note, even though he detained it after it became due. “Discounts against the assignor” do not mean that the assignee is liable for any balance over and above the amount of the note. (Paschal’s Dig., Art. 221, Note 284.)