The Dallas daily herald. [volume] (Dallas, Tex.) 1873-1887, 1884-10-22
THE HIGHER COURTS.
COURT OF APPEALS.


Mohrhardt VS.. Sabine Pass and II. y.
railway company from Harrison
county. Opinion by Hurt, ]. Two suits
were filed by appellant. ono for serv
ices from April %, 1852, to January /,
lSSI, and anothes for services from Jan
uary /, 1883, to January |, 1884. The
petition alleged contract of employ
ment by the month for $40 per month,
said sum to DO paid at the end of each
month. ON motion the two suits were
consolidated, and the amounts sued fur
being beyond the jurisdiction of the
county court they were dismissed.
Held over. Appellant had right Of
action, upon failure of appellee 90 pay,
the right 90 sue for tho entire amount IN
one suit, or for any part thereof ~ he
desired, and the court erred in dismiss.
ing the cascl Judgment OF cousolida.
ton vacated, aud Judgment ot dismissal
reversed. Reversed and romauded.
Fort Worth 81 Denver railway vs..
Akard vt al, from CLAY county; opinion
! by White, p. J.. All the que. tons Ia this
case were mndc upon statement OF
| facts In every material respect Identical
with the facts proven In this ease, and
so fur as doomed necessary, were FULLY
| discussed by us at the last Austin term
| In the ease Of tho Fort Worth a. Denver
! railway VS.. Johnson & Irito, a Texas
! Law Review, 2l5l, for the reasons
stated and the law az declared i'm tina,
opinion, The Judgment ia this case is
reversed and the cause reminded, Re
vcrsod and reWNudod.
Texas a Pacific railway company va
| Dyer, from pulo Pinto county. Opinion
| by White, y. j. Suit 10y appellee ON nr
rGuut for damages for destruction Of co.
dar posts. Judgment for appellee, APP
lpclllut appealed, and gave proper bond
and perfected his appeal under all the
requirements of ,Ae law. The Justice
ldisrcgardcd the appeal and issued oNo-
cutiun, AVID failed 10 send mp the papers
To the county court, Appellant pre-
scntud petition In the county Judge
, setting forth all the facts and PRAYING
the court tn grant aud ISSUE its writ oi
cc.tiururi, with such mandate az will
compel the aid Justice To sond uT
; the record ~ under appeal ia said cause
, and that said Cnusn he trict
! dc novO In the county court" Petition
was sworn To 10y appellants attorney
Court ordered the writ As prayed ior up
, ON petitioner giving bond for $5ll. II
= the county court the cortiOrRri was dis
missed for want OF sufficient cRuso
Held error au appeal by curtinruri WA
a not intended rs the object aud purpos
.t.l of the petition. 10 was moro I'M tho ma
/, turo of mandAmus, and the cnur
e should have tried the cnsO on appgH
!. de uovo. Reversed aud rcmanded
/. Block VS.. Weiller & Sousfrom Milan
\, county; Opinion by Hurt, !. Where tn
,, citation, ~ copied Ia the record, * nj
i tested hy the clerks az follows; "Mil
"a ness, W. ID. Pardon, clOrk of the count
] Of Al
ii my hand and seal OF Office
. Cameron, this the slst Ola
r, of June, a. u. 1854, w, d, Pardru, clcr
a. G, c., Milan county, II will br pr
n sumcd that the citation was mthv.
4 ticatcd by the seal Of the coutL Car
vs., Thomas, IL Texas, 5ti; Glenn b
10 Ashcroft, I Texas Law Review, ia
r. Where the sheriil's return showed IA
M the citation was executed "hy deliyeru
Ia to Ill. Block, tho within named deicu
+. ant, u true copy of this writ" Hpl
Sufficient, (Juhuson W. Barthold,
Texas, $50; y Texas, $500. Affirmed.
Nowlin Va. Hughes ct AL, from Ora
M son county; opinion by Wilson, /. A
ee pellant recovered judgment against u
ne polleCs IN county court, Appellee
" made motion for new trial, which W
W granted, but no order mpdc on minut
AT tn that effect. ~ same term of cnu
m. the motion tor new trial wns rOcunsi
IL cred and uvcrrulcd. This action W
re duly entered OF RECORD. The roconsid,
IN alton and Oyerruling OF tho motion W.
nm without notice To nppollees. Appellt
:" brought his Injunction to restrain {
levy uf an execution which had boon
sued ON the above Judgment aud "
about tn ho LOWED. Judgment Tor q
,lf pelloes restraining tho levy OF the q,
he cutlon md granting Appellee "a n,
nv trial IN the cause and Tor all costa. lie
nv error. IL was within the power OF I
To county court, at tho same time, to
IN. aside tho Judgment granting Rppellt
motion for now trial, and under jut
It's mont overruling tho motion. Tho .
he police had no good cause for iniuncti,
rs. The court also erred In granting app
as lees tho new trial, ny there is no PRAY
In tho petition for general relief. |
versed aud dismissed.
ot Fed aud Charters Common VS.. {
ay stnte, from Sabine county. Opinion
nm Wilson Admission of Illegal tas
X mony will not be considered, withu
uf the point " served by Ill OF exception
zee The court correctly charged that. :
~ you find that said declarations, cony,
sations and statements occurred a
were made at said limos aud places,
no SAID parties, as testified 10 by said v
ny ness, and that the defendant, Fed Co
nor, was present aud In such posln
". that In heard them. and that fhav N 4