The Dallas weekly herald. [volume] (Dallas, Tex.) 1873-1885, 1883-12-20
HIGHER OOUSIs.
Decisions Rendered In Suits before
the Supreme
Ana Appellate Courts, which are
Given In Full,
A Rendered in the various Cases
corar OF APPEALS.

tv or ninety days, IL so directen oy wy
plaitiff, his agent or attorney, when .ne
return day IL not speciied IN The execu.,on,
II IL returnable on the FIRST day OF the next
Term az The court from whence 1t issues.
Except for the purpose OF justiiying the ue-
tention and sale of properly previously 10y,
lad N NON. an execution after the re,urn uay
thereof il functus officio. Alter the returr
II dav of an execution levy cannot be mace
under Ii, nor is the officer holding even au-
thorized to receive money In payment up-
der II, nor will the officer attemptins 70 "a,
ecnte n he justified under it, II 10 then
Wild writ. In a trial of the right OF prop.
eftr. the claimant who was in possession Of
The property levied upon, Is permltteo 70
4 show that the proceeds under whlcn tne
lew was made, did not authorize the uls'
turpance OF his possession, ana TINS ne may
do even alter issue joined. Ainrmeu.
LaLoude va. Sun Mutual lhsnrahve oo, ~,
pany, from Gray son county. op';raa ~ ~
/ Willsonj A garnishee Is only required IN
hia ,,nswer 10 make true answer TO tne sew
ara, M atters inquired of in the VIII OF gar
nishme,t, A garnishi . Is not required IN nis
| answpr no set up every defence or clhih ior
| ~. rehtor. Thus where the fund or prop
erty in his hands 10 exempt from sarn'sn
ment the garnisbee is NOT Iequileu W
| claim tho exemption Tor deIt ,innt;nr -
earnishee is under no legal opllgaLion 70
enot;fv The debtor of the gsrnishmeni,
Whan a parnishee has fully answered all
he ia reouiI ed to by the statute TO answer,
and unrn such answer judgment III
cnnrt M competent jurisdiction is entered
1 against him, which Judgment ne mas paiu
Credited upon his debt to the ueD;9r- ~
| is a bar to any recovery agaihst sa'u gar
K,dd vs.. Dugau from Grayson county.
1 Opinion by Wilson Assignment q errors
1 IN Inc following words are held too defective
for nct,ca In this court: list. The court
srred in not rendering judgment ior
the defendant and against the
plaintiff. 70. TIE court erred ~ not ren.
deriDg Judgment for the plal19rs, a1 ior 'cs
| amount OF his damages: u Sr,;th
i from Smith county. Opinion by Wilson J.
| The VOID naccount" as used In article
/ Q o66 revised statues, is used in its popular
1 And not technical sense, and apples 70
| t-ansactions between persons IN which oy
sale mon the one side and purcnase upoI
! the other, the title to personal propeIs
| passed from the one 70 the otneI, sho ~
| created by general course of dealing, SOD Y
ooss r,ot. meaI, one, or more isolated trens'
| actions resting upon special contrsct. ne
| Yersed and renlanded ns.,
n Il As. II. rail pay. vs.. Lott from @il;
an, county. Option by White ?, J. article
425S OF the revised stafdte, nemauaius
penalty Of $500 for over onai So ea. 81 pas ~
! ,ha sct ~ April 10th, 1888, Article 4z0S
yevised statute, dsupuncing q penalty, and
ne legislature had the nght 70
re,aa, and thereby remit
anv torfeiture inGurredN Hereunder
that had not been reG7fSired sIlS aataany
/ paid. II z case irs&kba,c 49, az asnnans
itoat appeal The law BBsFdtss' = ~
M lsys h force when thar decision Aren
dsrsd And II q law which created pen
sltv ;s repealed after the Tepeaiing law
| 10 tes effect. no further proceedings can pc
,axan under the repealed law 10 enjoys
he penalty. Reversed and dismissed ~ |
Flewsllyn ct al. ,ys Pace. from Rains cstfn
". Option by Wilson 10 DRY when
he distress warrant has been "nlegaily
and ''unjustlyn sued out that damages
nnnr, tire bond can be recovered. Where
md verdict IL fnuud that the distreas war,
rapt had heen Illegally sued out, out olu
net and III IL mad been %upjnstly' sued
out. ana alec found damages both aotuai
and yin1ictiva against the pl9lntln ior
..'illegsllyn suing out the writ. LEO, ns
verdict dii not warrant . Judgment Tor
Ssmsges arsinst the plaintiff and the sure.
Ties on MS bond. II the verdiot had ionod
mat the writ had been uuiustly, ~ wen 90
;Ilevallv sued out the Judgment for tns
acti,ai damages would heve been sulhor-
Esd hui oussi as 10 the vindiciye dam
ages. Reversed and remendeo.
Texas 4 Pacific railroad vs., oon nUs.
Opinien by Wilson !. The sppii-
cation for continuance ID this case failed TO
show proper diligence to obtain the Desired
testimony. The conclusions OF the trial
indsr upon issues OF fact and law are not
erroneous. When issues Of TACT are SAP
mitted for determination TO- ludge nis
findings thereon are entitled TO tue same
weight ss would % me vsrui shsr.o az
ouestions Of fact for the Jury ana
not OF Law. Where . railroad company
i..sas q marty ground urou we rsght-of- \
vsv. TO be used % . place 10 store cotton.
stipula,ing in the lease that the company
wruId not DO liable for any lossee occas-
Toned By fire from its engines. HELD. sucn
rights Of : person who had no notice OF the
AiIibone vs. Texas & Pacific railway,
FINN kaufman county. Opinion BY Will
son.i The charge Of she court upon neg |
Ijge, &c and contributory neRligei ce 10 this
action Tor damages for destruction OF cot
ton by FIRE emitted from appeliees engine
near pror nifty 70 railroad track, even |
though he plscfs II on bis own land, may |
De guilty Of contributory negligence IN 80
do,ng. The evidences Il sufncient 10 sup
oort the verdict found. Affirmed.
Walker W. simkins ct al; from Navarro
equity. Opinion BY White. .. ]. "A tres.
pssser cannot claim occupsncy 10 soco
plrcsd upon the land nor for crope grown |
thereon and lett thereon By him. Where
remitfitur Vas entered In this court upon |
stpsal' and the Judgment wss reformed
md rendered 10 correspond Herewith. Id
iudeirg the costs OF the appeal
against The party entering tLs
rsmlttitur, IL being held that tne smoon.
court below. Reformed and rendered.
Efter W. Missouri Pacific railway, from
HINT county. Opinion b. White. y. ]. lfa
ersfute rives Q new remedy. not rxpuknsnt
10. or inconsistent with the old one. the
latter e NOT taken away: but parties bsye
their election between tne NO nr
ov inpliostion are not favored. ou' stsfufe
nav he 10 repealed. The bringing Of suis
vssis IN party no risht 70 . Isrs1coisf
mined on fhe lac, - stands.
not VIXEN The suit VS. bfouebt
bit vbsn The iodsns ,t vs. , re me-.
of ~vissnor sr,ssin- 81 The time Of the tris
sItboneh fifFsrpnf from fhose 10 foro< when
tbs su'f rss conmepced. The coussi'u-
f1r-~1 r-rrIbifion against retrokrc'ixe laws
Dos "a eject th~<< rules. The ruIe with
r~r<~f 10 ne .nhibifion o. the I<1islsfur-
n trss-'ers 9Th vested rifbt means cnly 1
- r-IrrIrI~E II common Is<. HEhu
r-orInr onf Of to-ts ere not eubrscen Il
80 ~ ne rnIr< Esr ~ claims ~ zen
lite. Imposed b. isv. "bst<rer my %
I--1 - ~ oarrf~t rtEtrfr Ftru'atnf
1900 - ehnnrfrf ~ H1rrEl'trf 80 =
81. rsrleIIfs rnf1 r1er rr.c ic4tif' -
frnrrrnri.1 ~ ar arf9aI. HIr-ll 90
~ ~r-T ltrfa|f nhen usr1 I1 H1frIt.
49,. /. 1910. mhrr raIr If = 1fTIfnrt
Z. 4, - - -.-'.irnsf. ArI - l1ft ri fts re-