The Dallas weekly herald. [volume] (Dallas, Tex.) 1873-1885, 1882-11-23
1ne ArrhllAte oOonfs


ANAff
,iayo NJ vi. VA Bagonl ifoiu Dfazos
unity. suit agans. appellants for dam.
"a for illegal seizure and conversion OF
pelloc's goods, claiming them TO belong
his brother. Appellee did not allege IN
4 petition that he was clerk or that, as
ich, lac was entitled to certain salary per
onth, lost through the Illegal seizure,
hich broke him up In business. On the
1 II he was permitted to testify to such
Ield, error. The wrong.doer is chargeable
'ith all consequences of his wrongful act.
he damages were not too remote, but not
eing alleged could not be proven. IL was
mon appellant to show that the sale was
fraudulent, as charged. They relied upon
evidence to do so. (Sce % |
Texas, 2O4,) That. case governs this. Re-
yersed and remanded. Wilson, ].
Davis VS.. Diamond Smart from Comp
county. Suit by Injunction to restrain
ippeIlees from selling cotton by virtue OF an
order of sale from the justice court, The
cotton had been purchased by appellant at
a constable sale as the property OF Bolton,
to satisfy q judgment in favor OF appellant,
who was in possession oil the cotton Deiore
foreclosure of the mortgage in favor OF APP
pellant. Davis was not made party TO
the suit of appellants against Bolton, IN
which the mortgage was toreclosed,
although in possession Of the cotton at the
time. The Injunction was dissolved. Held,
the appellant by purchase, holding the
equity of redemption, and being in poses
sion of the property, was necessary
party to the suit tor foreclosure, and. being
such, the Judgment OF oreclosure agaihas ;I
aIx,u hv iniupptlDn- Reversed ana
remanded, White, p. j.,
N. Euish VS.. Docke; from Washington
county. At common law, where land was
rented for money rental and the CONTRACT
contains no stipulation as to time of pay
ment, it becomes due at the end OF the
year. Our statutes make an exception Win
regard to landlord and tenant, where before
the expiration of the lease the tenant seeks
to, or does, remove agricultural products or
other property liable to landlords lien,
from the premises without consent of such
landlord. In such cases, though the rent
NAV not be due. the landlord has the right
to dstrain for his rents. The tenant herein
having sold some of The cotton, and being
about to sell more, the distress warrant was
properly sued out. The evidence does not
sustain the verdict. Reversed and re-
handed. White, p.j.
Wood vs. the State from Hunt county.
The Jury in this case having concluded
that appellant was guilty, agreed to make
up the amount of punishment thus: They
were to set down any number OF years not
to exceed fifty years and not less than I'VE
wears, and divide the ,sum by twelve, TIE
quoteint to be the amount OF punishment.
they also then agreed to abide by the re-
suit. Held, the verdict should have been
set aside. The verdict may not have been
decided by law, but it was not falr eX-
nracSinn of oninion Of each lurOr, The
agreement to abide by the result was fatal,
for the jury cannot agree before the
amount of punishment is ascertained to
abide by it. rhe improperly consisted in
such an agreement. Reversed ana re-
manded. Hurt, j.
Wilkerson VS.. the State; from Rockwell
county. The record fails to show a plea.
without plea by the defendant either OF
guilty or not guilty, there can be, no issue
for the jury to determine, and without such
their verdict, if conviction, is nudity
and must be set aside. Reversed and re-
manded. White, p. j.
Chicago, Texas & Mexican Central rail-
way VS.. Ritter and wife; from Dali county.
The elements of recovery in suit
for damages 1or cond ;n avon
notes. l. The legitimate damages sustained
by the condemnation and appropriation OF
the land for railroad purposes. =. A re-
coyery can only be had for the value OF the
land actually condemned and appropriated.
3. The benefits, if any, resulting TO the re-
mainder of the land by the construction
and operation of the road are Offsets. 4.
Such benefits or injuries US are sustained IN
common by the puolic generally ana hot
peculiar to the complaining parties are not
to be considered. 8. The value of the land
before the condemnation less the value OF
the portion not condemned after its appro-
pratiOn by its railroad is the measure OF
damages. Reversed and remanded. Whlte,
p.
Texas & st. Louis railway VS.. Reid and
wife; from Navarro county. In the original
suit the parties claimed damages because OF
injury to the separate properly of the wife,
then she was a proper party, but the suit
having been amended and the cause OF
action as amended set up Il cause OF action
for damages to the husbands crops, his
failings, ETC., and for exemplary damages
the wife should have stated her suit, she
was no longer a proper party. The basis
of recovery under the suit as amended was
the value of the crops at the time they We're
destroyed and interest thereon from date.
Reversed and remanded. Wilson, j.
Aycock vs. Doty, from Falls county. The
award sought to be set aside was statutory,
no right of appeal was reserved. Inc
grounds for setting aside are gross mistakes
in allowing an item of damages Tor dissolu-
ton OF the firm and perjury in appellee
before the commission. Held, either OF
the grounds if sustained by the facts are
sufficient to set aside the award. The suits
being properly consolidated, the court
should not have separated them. In one
suit appellant plead a judgment enjoined by
the appellee, In the other both parties
desired such to be allowed pro tanto on the
award. Held, the matters not being mat
tiers passed upon in the award and the facts
plead giving equity in appellant they should
have been considered. Other matters beng
plead, which were not passed upon IN the
award. ought to have been examined mo
the appellee. Reversed and remanded.
Wilson, j.
Conrad & Co. VS.. Walsh from Grayson
county. Where authority is given an
agent in the nature of a personal trust IL
does not invest the agent implledly with
power of substitution. 1t is purely personal
aud unless from the languag used, or
the fair presumption from ~ particular
nature OF the transaction, or the ussges OF
trade. a broader power was to be given, it
must so be considered. Declaration OF an
agent TO prove agency cannot be admitted
Ii is a violation of law for a Judge 10 re-
move from file and change bill oil excep-
tons after the same has been approved,
allo we'd and signed by him and placed on
file by the appellant. Reversed and re-
manded. Wilson,
Blum ct al. vs.. Wsssenl CHI from 1us sg
lupe county. On the trial below plsintifis
offered in evidence for the purpose OF show
ing that the goods were obtained under
false pretences and thereby justiiying the
levy of an attachment, two statements OF
the standing of appellees made by a mum;
Der of the firm. fine evidence was relecIeo
by the court upon what Rrounus - ~.
shown Held. il is evident they were net
excluded for want of authenticity, It ex-
cludes on tie ground that they were no not
evidence in rebuttal, 1t was error. ne
plaintiffs made out their case by establish, /,
ing their account and having the levy OF
the attachment SO as to secure Their attsch.
ment lien. The evidence OF apPelieese VEN ny.
1nlV toestablishing damages In 50 FAR as
49, stotanneufs landed TO show on what