Coburne v. Poe

Citations

• 40 Tex. 410

Syllabus

<p>1. When the assignee of a note upon which suit is brought fails to allege in his petition that he acquired the saíne before maturity, it is not necessary that the defendant, who is the maker, should aver in his answer that plaintiff acquired the note after its maturity, to authorize evidence upon defenses set up in the answer which would defeat a recovery as against the original payee, or an assignee with notice.</p> <p>2. The production in evidence by a plaintiff of the note upon which he sues as assignee raises a prima facie presumption of the truth of an averment in his petition that it was transferred to him. before maturity; but no such presumption can exist in the absence of such an averment.</p> <p>3. Errors committed in the court belotw will not be made a cause for reversal of judgment unless they are distinctly specified in the assignment of errors.</p> <p>4. The exception to this rule heretofore announced, “That objections which go to the foundation of the action will be considered, though not specially assigned as error,” limited to those cases where the matters of error are so obvious that the court would be doing injustice to sanction the judgment rendered below.</p>