Mays v. Rutledge

Texas Supreme Court
Mays v. Rutledge, 37 Tex. 134 (Tex. 1873)
Walker

Mays v. Rutledge

Opinion of the Court

Walker, J.

The record before us presents the proceedings in an action brought upon a promissory note, made by the defendants in error to I. A. Paschal, and by Paschal indorsed to the plaintiff in error.

The note was offered in evidence, but showing upon its face that the required revenue stamp had not been affixed to it by the maker, but by the indorsee, the note was excluded from the jury.

The judgment of the District Court in this behalf was erro*135neous. (See Schultz v. Herndon, 32 Texas 390; Id., 774, and subsequent cases.)

The plaintiff in error is entitled to a judgment in this court for the amount of his note, principal and interest, which the clerk is directed to enter.

Reversed and rendered.

Reference

Full Case Name
W. D. Mays v. R. A. Rutledge and others
Cited By
2 cases
Status
Published
Syllabus
In an action by an indorsee of a promissory note against the makers, the note, being offered in evidence by the plaintiff, was objected to by the defendants, because it was apparent upon the face of the note that the requisite revenue stamp had not been affixed by the makers, but by the indorsee; which objection was sustained, and verdict and judgment rendered in favor of defendants. Held, that the court erred in sustaining the objection of defendants to the introduction of the note in evidence before the jury. (Schultz v. Herndon, 32 Texas, 390, cited by the court.)