Case ID: tex_28/html/0598-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Smith, J.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Valentine Wampler v. A. G. Walker et al.
    There being no judgment in the court below in favor of two of the defendants, and a new trial having been granted to the remaining defendants, on whom alone there was valid service of the writ of error, it is held, that there being no final judgment, this court has acquired no jurisdiction by the writ of error sued out by the plaintiff below. (Paschal’s Dig., Art. 1476, Note 572.)
    A statement of facts which does not appear to have been approved by the judge of the court below will not be noticed in this court. (Paschal’s Dig., Art. 1490, Note 582.)
    On one of the defendants in error the writ of error had not been served at all, and only on the attorney of another defendant, without a showing that his principal could not be found: Held, that the service was incomplete. (Paschal’s Dig., Art. 1495, Note 587.)
    Error from Dallas. The case was tried before Hon. Hat. M. Bureord, one of the district judges.
    The plaintiff' in error brought this action against A. G. Walker, J. H. Cole, and D. H. Brundage, to recover a tract of land in Dallas county, and also for damage's. As the rulings are confined to questions of service of process, and the facts with reference thereto being otherwise sufficiently stated, a detailed account of the case is not requisite. :
    
      J. M. Crockett, for plaintiff in error.
    
      
      George W. Guess, for defendants in error,
    moved to dismiss the writ of error.
   Smith, J.

—In this cause we find that the motion of Walker for a new trial was sustained, and there being no final judgment, this court has no jurisdiction of the cause, as has been often decided.

The statement of facts does not appear to have been signed by the judge, by reason of which it could not be noticed in this court.

The writ of error has not been served on the defendant Brundage, and only on the attorney of the defendant Cole, without showing that he cannot be found. This service is incomplete. Dor these defects the cause will be stricken from the docket.

Dismissed.