Case ID: tex_116/html/0508-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Per Curiam:", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Morton Salt Company v. R. D. Keele.
    Application No. 15319.
    Decided May 25, 1927.
    (294 S. W., 1107).
    1. — Evidence—Compromise With Similar Claimant.
    Refusing writ of error, the court declined to approve the opinion of the Court of Civil Appeals that certain evidence on the trial was admissible. (The suit was by the owner of land for damages by overflow. The evidence admitted was that of a tenant of plaintiff that defendant had settled with him for damages by the same cause.) (P. 509).
    
      2. — Jurisdiction of Supreme Court — Evidence.
    Error in admission of evidence will not support jurisdiction in the Supreme Court where the judgment of affirmance did not turn on the correctness of the ruling admitting it. National Compress Co. v. Hamlin, 114 Texas, 380, followed. (P. 509).
    Application for writ of error to the Court of Civil Appeals for the Fifth District, in an appeal from Van Zandt County.
    The salt company appealed from a judgment recovered against it by Keele, and on affirmance (293 S. W., 224) applied for writ of error.
    
      J. S. Terry and S. W. Marshall, for petitioner.
   Per Curiam:

While we are not prepared to agree with the Court of Civil Appeals that the testimony of Mrs. Ballard was admissible, yet since we cannot say that the judgment turned on this evidence we have no jurisdiction, and the application is therefore dismissed. National Compress Co. v. Hamlin, 114 Texas, 380.