The Dallas weekly herald. [volume] (Dallas, Tex.) 1873-1885, 1882-11-09
THE AppELLATE COURTS.
synopsis of opinlog/ of the Court of
appeals,

goods seized by nlm ny iOioo ohu
t,on. Pitts set up an account for supplies
m reconvention. Blake also set up his ac-
count. There was a general cross-ire IN
accounts, resulting in a verdict for Blake.
There is no sufficient error upon which 70
reverse. The evidence amply supports the
verdict. The charge OF the court Is IN al
requisites essential, and the judgment Is al
firmed. Wilson, J.
Rutherford VS.. the State; from frankltb
county. The Indictment must contain w
KNOWN the name of the assaulted party AT
the time of the assault, and the name OF tne
assaulted party if afterward married, is not
sufficient IL the husbands name used. Inc
f~ollowing constitutes the evidence support
ing the finding: II had some words with
defendant; he pushed me down; l DON'T
know that be was mad was not aa.
Held. insufficient to support the verdict,
there being no intent to lnjure SHOWN. he-
yersed and remanded. Hurt J.
Jones VS.. Brazile; from Brown county.
| Suit brought upon an account upon an al
legged contract to carry mails. JuuglnebI
upon ouantum meruit for amount clailned.
Held, the suit being brought upona sp.e.clnc
contract a judgment could not be rendered
upon evidence disproving such. The EVIL
lance nroves that the services were rem
dered, but without any contract as to the
nrice. Held, error is refusing to grant u
new trial: 16 Texas, 406; % Texas, 2l9).
Reversed and remanded. Wilson, ].
F~rielander VS.. Johnson; from McLennan
county. A justice OF the peace Is such an
officer under the law asis authorIzea 70 re-
ceiye and administer oaths to aihdavlts OF
claim for the trial of the right OF properly
under the statute. 1t is not necessary
for the affidavit to state that be, the claim
ant owned the property before the levy, IL
is sufficient if it states that he owned II at
the tim Of the levy. The evidence amply
supports the verdict and judgment, AL
Harris VS.. the State; from Freestone county.
Although there may be a separate ana as
tinct final judgment yet II the Judgment
entered and the sentence pronounced con-
tam all the essentials Of a final Judgment as
prescribed by article 79l of the Uoue OF Orl.h-
NAL Proce dure, the appeal VIII no9,De uis-
missed for a want OF a hhal ]uasi nEin
Motion to dismiss appeal oyerruled. WAL
son,j,
AnnelIant was charged with the crlme'o1
Murder in the court below. Upon applica7
ton upon writ of habeas corpus, bail was
refused and the appellant prosecuted ms
writ to this court. Pending me appear
nom the judgment refusing pan the ee JnSv
and the defendant was acquitted, IL is
TcvsT to dismiss the appeal. He'll, the
AZ Cots heing before the court by GER
acate OF the clerk, the appeal will be dls-
missed, but appellant will be held pound
for the costs. Dismissed at appellants
Nevman VS.. McCullum ct al; from Dali
los county. Where the court in a suit OF! a
promissory note and a plea OF reconvehtlon
tor damages for failure to perform Inc con-
tract for which the note was gwen, recog-
nized both the claims, although the .orlgi-
nal note then sue upon may be within the
Jurisdiction of the court if the plea OF re-
convention setting E~pgrounus, sullcleht IN
themselves, is for damage exceeding Ine
Jurisdiction Of the court, it has no lurlsdlc-
.Iiion of the case; On Texas, 2G9; y
TeTa. son Reversed and remanded with
instrlVRon to dismiss, Wilson. j.
Pressler VS.. the STATE; from N~acogdoches
county. In a prosecution for selling liquors
to mirrors without the written "lsuee
or written consent of the parent, guardian,
or some one In their stead, the state must
sfirmatiyely prove the selling together
with a knowledge upon the part OF the seiler
thar the marty purchasing was q MINOR
Where an honest mistake is made IL Is al
missible that the minor passed for an adult
The court erredin refusing such evidence
Reversed and remanded, Hurt, j. E,
St Iouis. Iron Mountain & Southern rail
wav company VS.. Henderson. a passenger
having purchased a ticket for passage and
check Tor baggage over a combination nne
of railway from one company, each oil the
|, companies are liable for he ue transp,or'
tation of such baggage. The far markell
value only of the goods lost can &c
recovered. The goods being wear
, inc %anparel, huctuation or depreciation
in their market value cannot be recovered
/ Actual expenses incurred in searching ioi
} the lost baggage cannot be recovered. In
absence of special circumstances, reason
4 able yaide Ol The Use OF tLc soods JOY INV
: time detained are alone recoverable. Ac
E tual damages can be recovered rom potl
comnanies. when Jointly liable; exemplary
: DAMAGES only from the one guilty. OF thu
loss ior which damages are given. tSe'
similar ease. Texas d Pacific Halfway VS.
! ferguson, last Austin term) Wilson, !. ,
Mapes VS.. the State; from Live Gal
: county. In felony cases, when, an appea
! has been taken and the appeal dismissed
for want OF a maj gme =
. oause having been returned 70 the orlglna
| court from whence it came, a hnal JUG
p ment. punc pro tune, is entered, II IS abso
> iutelv necessary thai the defendant be II
Inc presence OF the court when such hna
) indgment Is rendered, or else II IS not vaiid
e and the appeal will be dismissed. a waiver
( Of this point cannot De MADE II II DC ~
/ reasons. The court has no jurisdiction 9
. The appeal until a valid final judgment ba
, heen entered. and consent Of parties car
moi confer Jurisdiction; and then tn
z waiver cannot be made by attorney, bu
: must be made By appellant himself. Al
{ peal dismissed. Wilson, J..
n FreiberR. Kline 4 90. vs.. Ihacker; 1rOr
{ Dallas county. Where an appeal has bee
4 taken from the judgment Of lower couf
and said Judgment has been affirmed D
his court. and the mandate issued an
n 6led in the lower court, the clerk cannot ,
held liable for issuing an execution on sue
mandate, althoughtbe Judgment original
Q entered In the lower court was reD1ers
e out of term time. Because the appellant
having appealed from the hrst judgment
and that Judgment having been In all thing
. seB -med bv this court, and the objecI 20
, moi having been made on that appeal, ths
= the Judgment appealed from was Foini IN
4 apneIlauts cannot make thai oblectio
nov. The Judgment Of anirmance tellle
I, Re v.lidiIv al that Judgment a. lar ne ~
: ~peiIanfs are concerned. and appellee va
not wrong 10 issuing the execution a
: Fdrineton W. Thomas; from BRAVO
] county. Ellington being principal credite
: Of estate Of Il prevailed upon Thomas :
administer IL Under order on CO.
n Tb0mas sold the lands 70 pay creditor
= N rneton uas The purchaser. paying y
: the lands By creditiug his claim which p
hsd aoriusf the estate. In Oroer not 20 pa
= ~ money upon these lands he CAV
Thomae hls written obligation that u n
|, e.frfs did not have sufficient 20 pay ~
n 49, 81 administration, be you'd settl
. ench With Thomas The estate IacEe
= $50 e payinE such costs. Ihomas me
: f1-srerm mon bis refusal 10 pay. and y
= rr~rred ftll Judgement Held, there was u
error IN The fudgnsut sDd he Judgment
\ LEARNED. Wilson, ].
: Onidsn e 81. "a Vel A Bro ron I,
= urr ourfg Appelees recovered lnoi
= rrruf for the value q certain EDols an
= Irferrsf thereon from - onfe q t1eis,y
. eandrs had lerie1 Or ne . 49,
r.,-rf ~ rooda rninE Sanders On ~
-~H~.1 h~rf ~ the Illegal seizure ~
2 n..n 49, 80 - S.,- ofrssisr5. Hsil