Volume 195 — South Western Reporter

<p>Appeal from District Court, Presidio County; W. C. Douglas, Judge.</p> <p>Suit by the Eirst National Bank of Alpine and others against H. D. Camp. Judgment for plaintiffs, and defendant appeals.</p>

<p>Appeal from District Court, Harris County; Chas. E. Ashe, Judge.</p> <p>Suit by S. J. Nussbaum and another against Joe Blumenthal and others. From a judgment for plaintiffs, defendants appeal.</p>

<p>Appeal from District Court, El Paso County; Ballard Goldwell, Judge.</p> <p>Suit by Sabino Urrutia against A. I. Boyd and others. Judgment for plaintiff, and defendants appeal.</p>

<p>Appeal from District Court, Matagorda County; Sam’l J. Styles, Judge.</p> <p>Action by the Rice-Stix Dry Goods Company against the Bay City Bank & Trust Company. From a judgment for plaintiff,, defendant appeals.</p>

Suit by the Texas Irrigation Company against J. Harvey ■ and the Bay City Rice Milling Company, wherein D. N. Dunbar intervened. Judgment for plaintiff against defendant and intervener and for intervener over against defendant Harvey, and intervener and defendant Milling Company appeal.

Appeal and Error from District Court, Jefferson County; L. B. Hightower, Jr., Judge. Suit by the Texas Bank & Trust Company of Beaumont against George W. Smith and others, and by the Beaumont Irrigating Company against Sadie C. McDonald, George W. Smith, and others. The cases were consolidated, and R. W. Flournoy and others intervened. From the decree rendered, the Bank appeals and the Irrigation Company brings error.

<p>Bills and Notes <®=375 — Innocent Purchaser — Illegality of Transaction — Effect.</p> <p>A note given for issuance of corporation stock in violation of statute is not void and unenforceable by a purchaser in due course before maturity for a valuable consideration and without notice of the infirmity.</p> <p>[Ed. Note. — For other cases, see Bills and Notes, Cent. Dig. §§ 971-981.]</p>

<p>1. RailRoads <&wkey;282(l) — Injuries to Dicen sees — Pleading—General Denial — Ee-sect.</p> <p>Where plaintiff, in a personal injury suit, alleged that consignment was in defendant’s railroad car, and that it was negligent in failing to have the ear repaired, defendant’s general denial put in issue the ownership of the car, as well as the negligence charged.</p> <p>[Ed. Note. — For other cases, see Railroads, Cent. Dig. § 910.]</p> <p>2. Railroads <&wkey;262 — Injuries to Persons Unloading Cars —Hidden Defects — Inspection.</p> <p>The ultimate carrier of the car, although it made ho inspection, was not liable for injuries to consignee’s servant, who, while unloading a carload of automobiles, loaded by consignor in a foreign car, was injured by a loose casting falling from over the door on the inside of the ear; the defect being one not discoverable by inspection of the outside of the car.</p> <p>[Ed. Note — For other cases, see Railroads, Cent. Dig. §§ 831, 832.]</p>

<p>1. Appeal and Error <&wkey;1002 — Review — Findings — Conflicting Evidence.</p> <p>Where the evidence is conflicting, the jury’s findings will not be disturbed on appeal.</p> <p>[Ed. Note. — For other cases, see Appeal and Error, Cent. Dig. §§ 3935-3937.]</p> <p>2. Venue <&wkey;l&wkey;REscissioN oe Contract— Misrepresentation.</p> <p>A suit to rescind a contract of sale on the ground of seller’s misrepresentations was properly brought in the county where the misrepresentations had been made, in view of Vernon’s Sayles’ Ann. Civ. St. 1914, art. 1830, subd. 7, providing that action shall be brought where the fraud was committed.</p> <p>[Ed. Note. — For other cases, see Venue, Cent. Dig. §§ 21, 27.]</p> <p>B. Evidence <&wkey;434(ll) — Varying Written Contract of Sale — Misrepresentations.</p> <p>In action to rescind a contract of sale on the ground of seller’s misrepresentations, evidence showing and bearing upon the alleged fraudulent statements was not inadmissible on the ground that it varied the terms of the written contract, although such evidence would have been inadmissible had the suit been bi'ought on the contract.</p> <p>[Ed. Note. — For other cases, see Evidence, Cent. Dig. §§ 2013, 2014.]</p>

<p>Appeal from Maverick County Court; Ben V. King, Judge.</p> <p>On rehearing.</p>