History
  • No items yet
midpage
Walton v. Cottingham
30 Tex. 772
Tex.
1868
Check Treatment
Morrill, C. J.

The first error assigned is, that the depositions of A. H. Cook and wife were excluded. As these depositions go to show the situation of the health of the girl sometime after the sale, and cannot by any possibility establish her condition at the time of or previous to the sale, the judge did not err in excluding the same.

The charge of the judge was full and correct, and as the testimony was conflicting and not unsatisfactory that the girl was diseased at the time of the sale, we cannot say that the verdict was contrary to evidence. The judgment is

Aeeirmed.

Case Details

Case Name: Walton v. Cottingham
Court Name: Texas Supreme Court
Date Published: Jan 15, 1868
Citation: 30 Tex. 772
Court Abbreviation: Tex.
AI-generated responses must be verified and are not legal advice.
Your Notebook is empty. To add cases, bookmark them from your search, or select Add Cases to extract citations from a PDF or a block of text.