
    Walsh & Gilbert v. Charles Moser.
    It is error to refuse new trial where judgment has gone against defendants as partners, on notes for borrowed money executed by them individually, where it does not appear conclusively that the money was applied to the business of the partnership.
    Appeal from Galveston. Tried below before the Hon. A. P. McCormick.
    This suit was brought June 5, 1871, by ■the appellee against the appellants, on two promissory notes; one signed by N. Walsh, November 19, 1867, for five hundred dollars; and the other for three hundred dollars, executed December 24, 1867, by T. D. Gilbert. Plaintiff alleged the notes were given for borrowed money, to be used in the partnership business of Walsh & Gilbert. Verdict and judgment for plaintiffs, and defendants appealed.
    
      Mills & Terns, for appellants,
    cited the following authorities : 3 Kent, 41; Poindexter v. Waddy, 6 Mun. Va., 418; Pearce v. Wilkins, 2 Comst. R., 469; 6 Vesey, 602; Collyer on Partnership, § 473.
    
      R. G. Street, for appellee.
   Walker, J.

This is an action brought on two promissory notes; one of the notes is signed by Gilbert, the other by Walsh. Moser sued the firm of Walsh & Gilbert. The notes are not given by the firm, nor is there any evidence to prove that the money loaned by Moser went into the firm.

The evidence in this case, so far as it was material to make out the plaintiff’s case, does not support the verdict. Appellee’s counsel virtually admits that the weight of evidence is against him. This is so apparent that the court below should have granted a new trial; and for the error in refusing a new trial, the judgment is reversed and the cause remanded.

Reversed and remanded.  