# Brown v. Singer Sewing MacHine Company

> Court of Appeals of Texas · November 15, 1961 · 352 S.W.2d 306

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9668598

## Case

- **Full name:** Mrs. D. J. BROWN Et Vir, Appellants, v. SINGER SEWING MACHINE COMPANY, Appellee
- **Court:** Court of Appeals of Texas
- **Decided:** November 15, 1961
- **Citations:** 352 S.W.2d 306; 1961 Tex. App. LEXIS 2045
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** On rehearing
- **Judges:** Hughes
- **Cited by:** 4 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9668598

## Opinion text

On Motion for Rehearing
Appellants pointing to the fact that the pleadings in prior suit No. 6351 disclosed that Mrs. Brown was a feme covert correctly state that the burden was on *308 Singer to plead and prove facts sufficient to overcome her disabiliy of coverture. Giles v. First National Bank of Brownfield, Tex.Civ.App., 257 S.W.2d 945 , Amarillo Civil Appeals. It follows that the judgment in Cause No. 6351 was not void. If a final judgment, it effectively adjudicated the nonliability of Mrs. Brown on the note and mortgage. It did nothing more. It did not adjudicate the title or right of possession of either of the sewing machines. It did not adjudicate appellant’s plea of rescission. In fact, the judgment reflects an intentional failure to rule on the plea for rescission. If the judgment in Cause No. 6351 was not a final judgment, it could not be the basis of a plea of res adjudicata. If it was a final judgment, it did not adjudicate the right of rescission which, alone, is accomplished by the judgment herein.
The motion is overruled.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9668598. Public record. Not legal advice.