The Dallas weekly herald. [volume] (Dallas, Tex.) 1873-1885, 1882-11-16

eensiy. a WIZ N attachment being
fdafad In OarHfH hnhd4i he helug n deputy
aleBU levied Hp1n The WAGON and team NJ
appellfa. Whilit fhe lister tlHiul us exempt
pr6poNg md lrlnga THIS Nnit l0f dliniera
Inc ptfty SUING uui attachment seeks ~
shield himself w alleging that The snlt
should be against Carter ns deputy sheriff
and bis Nifetleg upon big oiHclql bond
Tho evidence showed that appellee had
been found on the road aud he and his lain'
ily elected from the wagon aud left In the
wlg1u.ynrd. Judgment was given beloW
for gls7. The evidence amply supports THIS
verdict, No error " apparent OF record
and the jud 4ment must stand. Affirmed.
White, y.
McKie Va. Simpkins CT AL; from Navarro
county. Appellees as trustees sued appel
liant for the occupancy Of certain larm
and for damages for cutting timber from
the land. McKiu plead that believing the
land was his tcstator's, he went upon IL,
and put thereon valuable improvements to
greater extent than the value OF the
rents, etc. and plead in reconYention for
certain sug3 cane left thereon, etc. Judg-
ment was rendered in favor of appellees,
the plea of reconyehtion being stricken out
Held, the evidence is sufficient to support
the verdict, no error appears OF record, and
none have been pointed out. Affirmed.
| Wilson, j.
Goodrich VS.. King; from Falls county.
Suit was. brought by King against Good.
rich as maker and Jones as endorser of
certain note given by G. to j. for building
house. q. plead failure OF con-
sideration that the house was
not properly built and that
he was damaged, etc. Jones plead limita.
ton and want of diligence to fix liability
on him. King answered that before pur-
chasing the note he inquired of it from
Goodrich, and the latter said it was correct
and would be paid. Held, l. These facts
estop Goodrich from pleading failure of
consideration as against King. 2. Jones
plea of statute of limitation was good one
and was properly sustained. Affirmed.
Hurt, j.
Curry VS.. Terrell from Washington
county. When a suit originates in the jus,
tice court and either party fails to enter
any desired plea, upon appeal to the county
court he will not be allowed to plead any
new matter not 50 pleaded or set up in the
Justice court. The same rules govern ap-
peals to the county court AS apply to cases
carried up by certiorari. Reversed and re-
manded. Wilson'S j.
Reed & Co. VS.. Lockett ct al; from john
son county. This suit was brought by APP
pellees against the appellants for new
trial and Injunction. A Judgment by de-
fault was taken against Lockett, and exc
| Cution was LEVIED upon tne homestead OF
himself and wife. BY mistake the cousel
employed by Lockett had failed to file an
! answer. Judgment below was given. setting
aside the Judgment by default and perpet-
uating the injunction. Held, appellants do
not show any ground to rs for reversal. The
above facts warranted the Judgment rem
dered, and it is affirmed. Wilson, j.
Davis & Oats VS.. Leatherwood, ct al; from
Johnson county. This cause comes up be-
fore the court on motion to dlIniss the APP
peal for the want Of jurisdiction. The cause
was tried in the court below on
the probate side under article 2l7e
of the Revised Statutes; the amount
in controversy being $l3l.62. Held, the
court can do nothing but sustain the APP
peal. This being purely probate proceed
ing, the proper action would have been an
appeal to the district court. This cour
therefore, cannot consider it, and the ap.
peal must be dismissed. Wilson, j.
Gunter & Munnson vs. Austin College:
from Grayson county. 1t is necessary that
to ratify an authorized act and making il
binding on the party so ratifying it must
be made with full knowledge of all material
facts Ifsuch are unknown there can be
no ratification. 1t was agreed between the
parties that the recovery should be the
value of the land subscribed as put upon ii
by the trustees of the college in connection
with the party subscribing it. Held
having neglected to comply with this part
OF the contract, the trustees cannot claim
any advantage or equity by reason of It'll
having received in good faith the valuation
unlawfully set upon the land by an un
authorized party. Reversed and remanded
| Willson /