Poland v. Henry

Citations

• 64 Tex. 542

Syllabus

<p>1. Replevy bond — Judgment—Limitation.—Property attached during the pendency of a suit was replevied by the owner. Judgment was rendered against the owner, but the replevy bond had been lost between the date of the judgment and the time when it should have been indorsed “forfeited/’ the property not having been delivered according to the stipulation of the bond. More than four years later suit was brought to substitute the bond and obtain a judgment of forfeiture upon it. Held:</p> <p>(1) That the substituted bond would occupy the position of the one lost, which, never having been forfeited in the manner prescribed by statute, was not a judgment against the sureties who signed it.</p> <p>(3) That, had the bond been indorsed according to the statute, it would have required ten years to bar an action upon it; but being a mere moneyed demand against the obligors, under the then existing statute, four years barred a recovery on it.</p>