The weekly democratic statesman. [volume] (Austin, Tex.) 1871-1883, 1882-06-01

circumstances, Is binding upon her scpa-
| rate estate. Reversed aud rendered. I.
Watts, j.
Morgan ct ais. VS.. Attaway ct ais; ar
| peal from Falls county.-Where n iudg-
| ment recites either service upon, or nD-
| pearance by the defendant, it cannot be
attacked In collateral proceeding upon
| the ground that there was In fact no SER
vice. But on appeal, the transcript must
show service or appearance. Reversed
and remanded.-W ats, j.
Gosquet VS.. Collins a. Campbell; ap-
| peal from johnson county.-Afiidavit aud
| bond la attachment proceedings cannot
| be amended. In order TO authorize this
court TO revise an order OF the court be-
law quashing an attachment, exception
must be taken at the time and brought
up by proper bill. In the absence OF an
order of court directing the officer
| to retain possession of the property
pending conclusion of suit, the officer has
no right to hold it after the attt chment
has been quashed. Affirmed.--W ats, }.
Fleming VS.. jackson appeal from Nc
Lehman cOunty.--Where IL appears that
the appellant failed TO call the
attention OF the court TO the several
motions TO quash the writ OF
sequestration and bond, and TO secure a
ruling thereon, they will be considered
as waived so far as appeal Is concerned.
such motions, however, do not 20 TO the
action, and may be filed at any time be-
fore the trial of the cause. Motion by
sureties on sequestration bond, 20 have
Judgment reformed 80 as to exempt them
from liability, is addressed 10 the dlscre-
tion of the court and will be revised only
In case of abuse. Facts relied upon for
such exemption should be asserted
against the bond and trial had upon the
merits. That the property, the value OF
which was sued for, was purchased with
the means of the plaintiff must have been
affirmatiyely shown by him. The evil
dence in this case does not sustain the
verdict. Reversed and remanded.-
Watts, j.
Parsons ct al. VS.. Smith ct al; appeal
from Tarrant cOunty.-1hat the citation
upon which judgment by default was is
sued was not served i've full days before
return day, renders such Judgment void
able only, not void. Nor Is IL absolutely
void because the citation reads .fthis
writ certified by the clerk" instead OF
" this copy OF petition" No such In
terest Is shown in ", one of appellants,
as would authorize u Judgment in his
favor. The burden was upon him TO
show such interest. Aflirmed.-Wa ats, j.
Hutchins VS.. Lockett; from johnson
cOunty.-This case was formerly before
the court, on writ of error. There being
no mandate in the record to show the dis
position OF the case on appeal, the jugd-
ment below must be regarded as final,
and the appeal smissed.-Delaney, j.
Welsh VS.. Holmes; from Grayson coun-
ty.---A judgment by default admits every
material allegation except the amount of
damages, and such judgment In iresspass
to try title fixes the plaintiffs right and
the defendants liability. In this case
the judgment established the Plaintiffs
right to the land, and she could waive
damages. Afllrmed.--Delaney,
Trimbell VS.. Pierce; from Caldwell
c0unty.---The answer of defendant set up
that when he purchased the land the
vendor exhibited map showing contem-
plated location of railroad, and alleged
falseness of the map, but fails to show
wherein IL was false, nor does 10 aver d.
rectly any wrong done. Hence the court
did not err in striking out the answer.
Affirmed.
Stevens:et al. v. Nelson.et al. from Hill
county - though transfer may be made
to defraud creditors, still If the proberty,
without consideration, goes back 60
the widow as the representative
of the community of herself and nus
band, making the fraudulent transfer,
her rights attach the same AS though no
such transfer had been made. The effect
of bankruptcy Is TO vest the right OF
property in the assignee. and II may be
followed into the hands OF third parties
and subject to the debts of the party
making the transfer. Upon death OF the
husband, one-halfthe community vests In
the wife and One-ha,f TO the children.
The question of community or seperate
property is one of fact. PriDid fGcie, all
property owned by husband and wife IL
community, and the burden of proof is
upon the party asserting the contrary.
Reversed and emanded.-Delaney,J
Cook VS.. Washington appeal IRON
Collin county---Assignment OF error
which Is so indefinite as TO tail TO specify
distinctly the error complained OF will not
be considered. The court below properly
sustained objection 10 the reception in
evidence OF a certified copy of the testl-
mony of A., taken before a committee OF
the congress ofTeXas, as TO his surveys
of this and other lands, that evil
dence being taken in AN eX-parte pro-
ceeding TO which the appellee was not a
party. The evidence, though conflicting,
cannot he held against the verdict, aud
this court will not trench upon the
opinion Of the jury In determining the
crudibility of witnesses. Affirmed
Watts.J.