Woods v. Huffman

Citations

• 64 Tex. 98

Syllabus

<p>1. Amendment — New cause of action — Costs. — A suit was brought tore-cover the value of machinery alleged to have been wrongfully converted by defendant. Afterwards by amendment the plaintiff charged that the defendant wrongfully procured an attachment to issue and to be levied on the machinery, and had it sold for a nominal price to satisfy a debt due from plaintiff to defendant, whereby he was damaged by having the property thus sold sacrificed. Held, that the amendment presented a new cause of action, and plaintiff was chargeable with all costs incurred up to the filing of the amendment. The right to amend, changing the character of the action, existed.</p> <p>2. Limitation.— The limitation of two years applies to an action to recover damages claimed on account of the seizure and sale of property under an attachment wrongfully sued out. In such a suit the cause of notion could not have accrued at an earlier period than the date when the property was seized under the writ.</p> <p>8. Attachment. — An attachment is wrongfully sued out when the facts on which it is based do not exist, and the defendant in attachment can recover whatever actual damages he sustains by the seizure of his property under the writ thus wrongfully obtained.</p> <p>4. Damages.— In a suit to recover damages caused by the sacrifice of property by sale under an attachment wrongfully sued out, the fact that other ground for attachment than that mentioned in the writ existed, while it might perhaps be pleaded and shown in mitigation of damages, would not constitute a defense to the action.</p> <p>5. Same.— The irregularity of the proceedings under which property is thus wrongfully seized and sacrificed can constitute no defense in an action for damages.</p>