19 Tex. 148 | Tex. | 1857
This was an action by the appellees, who were plaintiffs below, against the deceased intestate of the appellee, for a carpenter’s account, amounting, as stated in the
Record from the Justice’s Court, to - - - - $80 50
Cr. by.......... 33 50
$47 22
This is not exact by some cents, but is copied literally from
The defendant moved to set aside the judgment, as not authorized by the verdict. The plaintiffs moved to amend the verdict and judgment.
The motion to set aside the judgment was regarded as a motion for a new trial, and was overruled; and the only question before this Court is, whether the verdict was sufficiently certain to authorize the judgment which was entered.
This was an open account, an unliquidated demand, and which, in the opinion of the jury that tried the cause before the magistrate, was subject to some deduction. The suit was contested, and the jury could find—and so they were instructed—only such amount as was proven to be due. If the demand had been liquidated, it is doubtful whether a general verdict for the plaintiffs would be good, especially in cases before a magistrate, where offsets and deductions may not be distinctly pleaded. (2 Rawle, 53.)
There was no writing between the parties, to show the amount acknowledged as due,—and it was the duty of the jury to find whether any thing was due, and what amount specifically. General verdicts for parties frequently are good. They may be rendered certain by applying them to the facts as averred in the pleadings. But it is a loose and dangerous practice to receive such general verdicts on open, unliquidated
Judgment reversed and cause remanded.
Reversed and remanded.