Andrus v. Pettus

Citations

• 36 Tex. 108

Syllabus

<p>1. YYhere parties had improperly joined as plaintiffs, in a suit on two different causes of action, it was not error to permit them to amend their petition by dropping one of the parties plaintiff, and withdrawing his cause of action. Such amendments, however, are subject to the supervision and control of the court, and should be granted only on just and equitable terms ; and if a party through ignorance or carelessness joins unnecessary parties, he should be taxed with all costs up to the time of amendment.</p> <p>2. In defense to a suit on a promissory note, the defendant put in a plea of set off in reconvention, alleging that the plaintiff was indebted to him in the sum of two hundred dollars for services rendered the estate of F., deceased, at the request of the plaintiff, who was administrator of the estate. Held to be a good defense, and that the court below erred in excluding evidence offered to establish the plea.</p> <p>3. An administrator who employs an attorney to transact business for the estate he represents, is personally responsible to the attorney for his services, there being no special contract; but the attorney has his choice to demand his compensation either of the administrator individually, or of the estate. (Caldwell v. Young & Morgan, 21 Texas, 800, cited by the court.)</p>