The Dallas daily herald. [volume] (Dallas, Tex.) 1873-1887, 1884-01-04
THE HIGHER COURTS,
Sundry Kuoity Poinis Of Law Unrav'
eled by the Light
or Legal Logic Reflected From the
Appellate Tribunals.
Several Cases rlnally Disposed of.
svFRENscbuRr,

svTKENs cbuRr
Houston & ltNss Contra, railway Va, IL
eto; from Graysoa COUNTY, Opinion by Do
lsney 4 adopted. Assignments NJ error,
that the court urfrd ln ne charge and also
in rsiusiuF .i.r.Hs .,sud, sifhnnt p.fticu
lAfiEiug A. $40 che rrrof axe 'asuNclall.
Likewise iIn assignments kust The
court eTfut tH rr'usluE row rial sud tlAi
the verolt 's cInlf4fg 10 mo lhW The eN-
idence hvlrn u kuficienI tosi tain the
verdict inr uHmhYrs Tor injuries su,e 10 q
brakeman thilr Cuuulgg .Hft sold iulur %
being tut ....4 IS isNIs iutO ditch
which he Old Ul. kuog ui AHd having MS
hand run over hy tho trsiD. AA0 che
judgment Tor 5000 held NOT excessive. At
hrmsd.
Chain .ros. Grays1n county. opinsn ~
Watfs f. ADOPTED, The aiN.ute Ia tutoi
provides thnt a. actions OF trrspAss Tor IN
fury done - the estate Oi another thtll 10
canine Ctd aud sued within tvn years
next NJ or tho cause OF action OF suit.
Whtrs neither the genera ttgtHtes nor ths
special SCI contains any specific hnihtiou
in regard lo claims upon railway com
panic. for land damages, The general stat
ME Of linn tattou II action. Tor slhips Of a
similar character apply. Linaitatisn 10
available ~ a deieuso against statutory
remedy for the recovery OF damages result
Ing rom he lstruCtion Of railroads. To
constitute an innocent purch iser II must
appear that he paid tho purchase money
without actual or constructive NOTES Of
the prior right. The mere recital In tbs
deed Is no. Sufficient 10 establish that fact
80 . 90 c0usItuts an innoctnt purchaser.
Reversed aud rrmsnded
Grain @. ~ ye. Wright a. al, from La
mar county, Opinion OF Delaney,
Adopted. Grain and wife aud Nancy Holt
were cited 20 answer claim set up by de-.
fendsnts in their warranty. They were
not smeusble to plsinufi, nor directly ia
trresie1 ll his claim. They should, there-
fore have bsou ssrvei with 4 copy OF dc.
feadants cross.3iil. The record contains
no proof thai Jane Crsin received any
property rom he estate si her father, there
fore thers IS 10 grouni upon which she
could be undo responsible upon her ia
thsr'sw -ren.V, ls5 Texas 79Il. Rsvsr'ed
and demanded.
knegay vs.. Batto Vt al from Dallas
county. Opinion by Walker, p. J. Appel
liant caused 8 distress warrant 10 issue
against the property OF appelecs, situated
IN q siorshouse Tor rent thereof due TO APP
uellan1. AT the time the "act conserving
rents aud advances" approved Apr! 4,
1874 (Pac Dig. 7sl8 C. and 74ls p.), was in
iprcs. which act was con'trued in
Rosenberg 4 shapsr 81 Texas, 1889 n ref
orspee 30 the precise question herein iu-
VOWED. f. was then held, thai said oct
gives n lien TO landlords 10 towns and cities
upon goods wares aud merchandise in he
rented prem ises TO secure rents that may
become due. Reversed and remsnded.
Nos et el., vs. II llsoy ~ al from John
zen county. Opionion by Watt Adopt
ed April IL, 1871. The districI court had
Jurisdiction Co amend and set aside the
will in question. Fresnuiug IA favor Of
its judgment, IL mast be considered that
the will had as binding force. 5s Texas
~. Mira Moss WAS equally interested IN
the Galveston land with the children, and
fin dispcsing Of the trust N tai nntrusted
10 her she deemed It heat TO not deliver the
deed to the Ellis land, she is not liable to
appellees for their interest lost thereby.
Reversed and remanded.
Moody II Jsnnison W. Ptschsl % al, from
Denton county. Opinion by Watts, ].
Adopted. Where two or more writings ore
executed at the same time, between the
same parties, and with relerencs 10 the
same subject matter, they ore to be taken
az parts OF the ssns transaction and as
form.sg ole entire agreement 10 TeIss
a0C An assignment for the benefit OF
creditors may consist ia one or more instru.
msnts aud where two or more Instruments
are executed simultaneously between the
same parlie with reference to the same
subject matter, which, when construed to-
gsthpr constitute an assignment for the
bsnefit Of creditors they will be SO con.
strued and held by the courts. Reversed
b ount at al. vs. Speer ct al, from Van
Z.ndt codnty. Opinion by Watts, J.
Adopted Shit 60 cancel q patent to land
made in 1862. Appellants claim through q
location, survey, etc. msde in 1872. Held:
The board OF land commissioners OF Shelby
county had no authority to Issue the pat
eut wher purported to have been issued. IL
was, therefore, Issued without authority,
and its invaliaity is apparent on It's face.
Il Texas, l0e). But ths constitution OF 1859
Las "a In
patspt from subsequent location. (Sec. 3,
Arr. Z, Const. 1869; Howard ,27l; 40 Texas,
as. 81 Texas, III; So Texas, l0). Affirmed.
Hosker W. Williamson; from Pamela
county. Opinion by Watts j. Adopted.
The couri correctly sustained exceptions to
IN, petition and amendments, setting up
the arbitrator's award az basis for recoV'
cry. The arbitretors appended to their
nSarl lLe following: Tvs agree 90 eorl-ct
auy error that may be discovered IN this
,ettlemsnt," and the court correctly hold
that this was reservation OF judicial au-
thority TO DO exercised thereafter by the
arbitrators and thSt this rendered awards
aullity. Affirmed.
R.syes VS. Gholson, from williamson
oounty Opinion by Dslsny, J. Adopted.
Tho QUESTION is, is the agreement upon
which the work was done and the material
fnrnished. within tho statute OF frauds!
D.fendsnt insists that tho debt Was that OF
tn. contractor who undertook 20 build the
house; that plaintiff made his sgreemsut
With ths contractor and furnished the ma.
tsrisl and did the work for him. that
promise to pay was conditioned. that be
should have In his hands money due the
contractor. Plaintiff admits the original
agrssmsnt with the contractor, but alleges
thst becoming doubtful Of his pay, he
ABANDONED his contract and was about TO
remoys kis material from this building
when defendant agreed, that II he would 10
en- and complete the WORK
he, hlns'if, would lsy Tor II,
was done and the material furnished; he
claims that it was an original independent
contract hv defendant, and binding
whether verbal or in writing. Held: The
conflicting evidence was passed on by the
jary and is conclusive. The law OF the
case ia settled by the case OF Green vs.. Dali
Ishsn (54 Texas, 2sl) and Pool We. Sanford
(S2 Texas, 62i). Affirmed.
Houston & Texas Central railway W.
Hook. From Navarro county. Opinion
by Stayton j., Article 1882, Revised Sta
tutes, has no application 10 any matter
which does not pertain properly ana
strjc,ly to the estete of the decedent. A
Judgment In a suit for personal damages
not being part OF the estate TO DO dis
hursed 10 creditors or distributed to heirs,
IL no part Of the estate. When tempo
rarv administrator was appointed and qua
lifted June q and instituted suit the next
dav and in July following was appointed
and Qualities ~ the administrator OF the es'
tate. and having brought the suit as tenn
porary administrator and prosecuted ~ as
inch until after the lapse OF the term oil
I;mitstion. when he amended aud set up
ann,intment as regular sdministrsto,
heid the action was not barred. Affirmed.
Cb,stmas In . stockade.
A.tbe guests were rising from dinner
taple which had been covered win Tue
s,'sod tbinss of the season, one OF them said
m III, hostess: mo one could have enjoy,