The Dallas daily herald. [volume] (Dallas, Tex.) 1873-1887, 1884-05-05
THE COURTS.
COURT OF APPEALS.


Fortress ct oil w. the State; from Bexni
county. Opinion by Wilson j. Oae OF the
REQ uisites OF bail bond is, that IL state the
time and place when end where the accused
limits himself TO appear, aud the court on
magistrate before whom he Is TO appear
In stating the time. IL IS sufficient to specify
the term of tho court, and in stating the
place, I is sufficient 10 specify the name oil
the court or magistrate and of the county,
GO. @. 7. Art. 1881. Where the bond Ia
conditioned, "now, II the said R9iney For
tress shall make his personal appearance
before the distric court o. Bexar county 10
answer to said indictment instsnter, 10 be
holden in the town Of San Antonio, A. ID.
1882, there to remain until discharged by
the court" etc. Held; The bond
sufficiently specifies tue time aud place.
The word instapter has legal signihcat'on
and means usually within tho next twenty.
four hours or when not this then within
4 reasonable time under the clrcum Stances
OF tue case, with reference to which II Is
nsed. (Boovier's, Abbott's, Burvll's and
Whorton's law dictionaries word "In-
sta ter" Affirmed.
Shaw va. Adams, ct. al; from Dallas
county. Opinion by Wilson, ]. Suit By
Adsms, ct. al, to recover certain personal
property alleged to belong to them and
wropglully detained by Shaw. The petition
prayed for possession of the property, or in
The alternative for its elleged value.
1926 Held, l. Without bill Of
exceptions taken thereto, an alleged
error In the court oyer.ruling o motion
So, Railway company We. MoAllister. Texas
Law Review. 2. II the names OF plaintiffs
are incorrectly stated, the defect can only
be reached by plea In abatement and not
by special exception. (Snyler & Bassett's.
pl. and pr, Sec. 21). 3. IL is sufficient ia
an action tor the recovery Of property, for
plaintiff to allege that he is the owner OF 1t,
without deraigaing his title thereto, or
stating facts constituting him such owner.
In actions like the present. (sctions for con.
version of personal property the source OF
plaintiffs title may be proved under o gen.
eral sverment OF title or ownership. (At-
bolts trial evidence, p. 62s). 4. 1t IL only
necessary and more proper to state the
value OF each article OF property. lS2,
Of the property. Adams ct. al. claimed
Under q deed Of trust sale. The petition
and deed OF trust describes the properly az
9Th. saloon situated in the city OF Dallas,
on the corner OF Lamar and Pacific
avenue, known as the Wichita saloon. In.
GLIDING the fixtures, bar furniture liquors,
The property IL not sufficiently identified.
either In the petition, deed Of trust, or by
evidence, TO warrant recovery Of the same.
Reversed and raUnauded.
Texas Il Pacific Railway vs.. Mcdonnell:
from Tarrant county. Opinion by Will.
son, 4. The proof showed that appellee got
on appellants train at Cisco TO 90 to Fort
Worth. He had an expired limited ticket,
which he offered 10, the conductor. Tnis
was refused. and he was told that
he must pay his fair or get
OF at the next station. Appellee having no
money did notp ~ his fare. nor did he get
Off al The next station. When about q mile
beyond the station, between and 2o'clock
at night, he was put of the train near (but
how near 10 not shown q station house, be-
tween which place OF ejectment add the
mart station there vsss trestle on the road.
The night was cold and damp and appellee
had nc overooat, and was suffering from an
OLE gun shot wound in his leg, compelling
him 70 remain near the place Of ejectnent
fat which no one 10 shown 70 have livec) eli
night, from which he suffered greatly from
co{d. etc. On this evidercs Judgment We
renderod for $50. Held. not exoss-
i've. Hold further. when . railroad
ticket IImits The tine within which it must
Is ned. The holder b Doe onlitlod . -
~ sitcf that tine- (Hueeh- o. Or. -.
W5') App5lIoo W. thses1erA . lg1Dosssr.
;'I ;:;;;;' : =; =; I;