The Dallas weekly herald. [volume] (Dallas, Tex.) 1873-1885, 1884-10-30

/ nisssiie Nv show ihai u decd NJ blil ID
I sale, absolute ~ conditional ~ lis irfe
/ h. u mortgage, hut not ~ rniiNOrFp" II
I the in4irnuftif Zoos not contain The ~
/ snntlnl rpuuislins Uf 10 conveyance, valid
ana Uifu0iunl IN itsnii ~ pnss tho title,
| 10 cannot be- made 80 Wy extensive owl
dence. Affirmed.
EppsiDiu a Go. W. Holmes x Grain ~.
ala fTpm Lamar county, Opiulpn Nv
/ Wnlkur, %. /. Adopted. Tho main qucs-
| ton in the ease u, docs the appeal uudCr
a cost bond conclude Tho appellants
| right 10 prosecute writ NJ error On tho
Judgment nppOalo irumy Both species
aud kinds Of appeal nTo provided tor hy
statutes, and 10 limitation un terms
qualities the general right "a take an tp-
Iual or wri. of error 80 a. tn cpniiLH IL
party o. his appeal alone, " lac elects It
tho term uf the court at which tho JUG
mont Is rendered, L. prosecute such up-
prul. The statute giving party an vIt o.
ton Of the modes Of appeal docs not
prescribe that the selection of
ono mode shall preclude him
from the benefit ul the other.
llo cannot use both of these
CARA, ~ Texas, J1l,l The present ca,r
differs from that Oi Thomas vs.. Thomas
(J7rexAs, $40, IN thut hOrn both the APP
peal and witt of error ara returuNblo %
the same torn, uud li Is evident that the
lattOr was not sued cut Tor delay. An
appeal and writ uf error may both be
presented whore II l. done IN good faith
and In suhservonce 10 the intent and
objects of iho statute. Reversed ANA re-
mauded.
KAHN W. fsracsOn NJ al; from llnrri
son county, Opinion by StAytOn, ].
In appeals from tho county IA tho dis
tri court he appeal Is perfected when
notice of appeal Is givon In tho county
court and properly entered In the NM
utcs: when this was done, April IL, and
the transcript fileI May =, although the
term Of the district court began on April
2Slh, tho case was properly called for
trial May 7. The sole purpose of the APP
peal bond IL to suporcedo tho execution
Of the Judgment and suhsorvos no iuris-
uictiOnal purpose. None oil the grounds
named 10 Arts. 2iH, 2jOl aud 2Gl5, Rev.
Stats. embrace the removal of "A guar
dian in order that some person who
originally had tho prior right 10 the
appuintmGnt, but who failed or refused
to apply for it, may 10 APP
nplnted. The enumeration of Ger
thin grounds for the removal OF guar
dams excludes Tho idea that 10 was in
tended by the Legislature that they
might be- removed on grounds not
named. IL the one having prior right
TO hs appointed guardian waived That
right, which requesting another to re-
ceiveihc appointment. aud consenting
To such an apuuinlUrul n.y. .IntS 10,
such person waving such right 40 the
apuointment would not be heard. To
ask the removal of the guardian in or
der to receive the appointment To the va
cancy thus made. The right 10 he APP
pointed guardian of the estate of the
minor is governed by the same rules.
Under tho law now the surviving parent
is tho natural guardian of his or her mi
nor child. and is entitled to be appointed
guardian of the minors estate, but such
parent is not the natural
guardian of the minors estate,
appointment as such guardian by the
county court is necessary TO acquire
such relation. The order of county
courts appointing guardian OF the
estate ola minor is conclusive ofthe fact
that he was not disqualified To act and
was entitled thereto, until it is SET aside
by some direct proceeding for that pur-
pose. Reversed and remanded.