Skip to main content
· 2/3/1882

Wooters v. Smith

Citations

  • 56 Tex. 198
  • 1882 Tex. LEXIS 18

Syllabus

<p>1. Judgment.— A judgment against one of several joint contractors merges the contract, and thereby defeats an action thereon against the other parties thereto, at common law. But under the statute (R. S., 1256) a different rule prevails; a discontinuance may be entered as to a co-defendant net served without affecting his liability in a subsequent action; and the same rule applies to parties who might have been made parties, but were not joined in the suit.</p> <p>2. Same.— Only such parties as are liable as indorsers, guarantors or drawers of accepted bills are exempt from the operation of the rule above announced.</p> <p>3. Bond.— See opinion for a bond exacted by an officer which was neither good as a statutory or common law bond.</p> <p>4. Bond.— To sustain a bond as a common law bond taken by an officer under color of authority, it must appear in substance that the persons seeking its enforcement or those in privity with them agreed and consented to the contract evidenced thereby with the makers thereof.</p> <p>5. Ratification.— Parties intending to ratify a contract must ratify it as an entirety, and this must be done while the other party thereto is living. The minds of the parties must.meet at the time of the ratification, but when ratified the contract will relate back.</p> <p>6. Bond.— A bond given as a condition to be permitted to enjoy a right clearly given by law, demanded by an officer who has possession of property which he has seized under process, cannot be said to be a voluntary bond when it is more onerous than the statute prescribes.</p> <p>7. Same.— The taking of such a bond should be regarded, in the absence of explanatory facts, as evidence of the fact of a refusal to deliver the property unless the bond was given. Exacting the bond under such circumstances would be as to the maker coercion and oppression, which would invalidate it as a common law bond.</p> <p>8. Limitation.— See opinion for facts under which the bar of limitations applied

Judges: Stayton

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.