Pierce v. Wright

Citations

• 33 Tex. 631

Syllabus

<p>1. The language of the statute (Paschal’s Digest, Art. 228,) requiring pleas impeaching the consideration of sealed instruments to be under oath, is plain and unequivocal, and the courts cannot create exceptions to its requirements; and this court has by repeated decisions settled that they are imperative and must be obeyed. Therefore, notwithstanding that a sealed instrument, shows upon its face that there was no consideration to make it binding in law, that defense must be asserted by a plea supported by affidavit, as required by the statute referred to, and is not available by means of a demurrer or exception.</p> <p>3. On the trial of an action on a bond which obligated the defendant to save the plaintiff harmless against a note executed by the plaintiff to a third party, who had sued plaintiff on the note, it was not error to allow the plaintiff to put in evidence the record of the suit against him, in connection with proof that he he had paid off the note</p>