From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Goddard Machinery Co. v. Industrial

Court of Civil Appeals of Texas, Waco
Oct 26, 1961
351 S.W.2d 371 (Tex. Civ. App. 1961)

Opinion

No. 3944.

October 26, 1961.

Appeal from the County Court at Law, Jefferson County, George Buford, J.

Carl R. Griffith, Beaumont, for appellant.

O.B. McWhorter, Port Arthur, for appellee.


Plaintiff sued on a verified account. Defendant's unverified answer pleaded payment and accord and satisfaction. The court concluded that in the absence of verified denial under Rule 185, Texas Rules of Civil Procedure, defendant was 'not entitled to offer any defense as pleaded', withdrew the case from the jury and rendered judgment on the pleadings for plaintiff.

This was error. Even in the absence of a sworn denial, under the Rule, defendant's pleaded defenses in the nature of confession and avoidance were available. Yelton v. Bird Lime Cement Co., Tex.Civ.App., 161 S.W.2d 353, syl. 6, writ ref. w.m.; J.M. Radford Gro. Co. v. Porter, Tex.Civ.App., 17 S.W.2d 145, 147, writ dis.; Glasco v. Frazer, Tex.Civ.App., 225 S.W.2d 633, 635, writ dis.; McConnon Co. v. Klenk, Tex.Civ.App., 11 S.W.2d 222, 223; American Druggists Synd. V. Holt Drug Co., Tex.Civ.App., 272 S.W. 508, 509; Queen City Motor Co. v. Texas Auto Supply Co., Tex.Civ.App., 241 S.W. 212, 214 and cases therein cited. Reversed and remanded.


Summaries of

Goddard Machinery Co. v. Industrial

Court of Civil Appeals of Texas, Waco
Oct 26, 1961
351 S.W.2d 371 (Tex. Civ. App. 1961)
Case details for

Goddard Machinery Co. v. Industrial

Case Details

Full title:CODDARD MACHINERY COMPANY, Inc., Appellant, v. INDUSTRIAL EQUIPMENT…

Court:Court of Civil Appeals of Texas, Waco

Date published: Oct 26, 1961

Citations

351 S.W.2d 371 (Tex. Civ. App. 1961)

Citing Cases

Television Broadcasters, Inc. v. Motion Pictures for Television, Inc.

In order to show such payment, it was not necessary to deny the justness of the verified account under oath.…

Rose v. Shearrer

McDonald, Texas Civil Practice, § 8.07 — B. However, even if we should assume appellants' claim was properly…