The Dallas weekly herald. [volume] (Dallas, Tex.) 1873-1885, 1884-11-06

7
rs objectionable ~ that Of defendant
counsel, tho error uf the court In per
mitliug ID, IN not sufficient to reverse on.
The calling Of tho name Of a station,
on coming Ia stop, II Ia ho
regarded as an invitation TO Rlight, aud
u passenger who ON such summon,
leaves the ear, taking duo caution Ia
look around when practicable, may re-
cover from the company In case he la
injured by ignornn'ly stepping on an
unsuitable place, the Judgment was
for ,lH,uUu l0r iuiurir, received, aud j.
held not tp boz c,,ccssIye, Affirmed,
Texas y Pacific railway ", SiN,o
Garcia, from Harrison cpuuiY, bpiu ION
hy Stay.uu, /, The only question
noticed lu hrlri of appellants counsel in
this cuSc II that tho court below lu-
slur,,d Tao Jury that they might CON
slider money spent for his own hoard
during tho iimo hu was necessarily de-
tanned Ia attending a. his son, the mp
pr'lce In the uhuNf ease, ihcrc was
mo prpbl oi any specified sum $50 ~
pended, oNcout the sum %,
Sii. N0 objection WIS made
Ia the evidence when offered,
AppCllvc's home WAS IN the CSiremc
western limits pi the state, he was
detained nt Marshall, Texas, and nj
Baton Rouge, ln,, Tor over three
months On account Oi lhc confinement
ut his minor son from injuries received
thorough the negligence of appellants
employees, IA the proof went To the
Jury without objection, IL might be con-
Sidrrcd In connection with all the other
facts in the case. II. ~ q. y. railway,
vs.. Miller, ~ Texas, 3S2. Affirmed.
Chambers X rhigpew vs.. Cannon et
AL; from Morris county. opinion by
Willie, g. ]. The district court has iuris-
diclion To restrain the Sal0 of mule
claimed To be exempt. u Texas Law
review. 2l3D Having obtained iurisdic-
ton by injunction, il was proper for the
court 10 take cOgnizance of the cause for
all purposes of the suit. Courts of
equity once acquiring jurisdiction OF the
cause, the tull merits of the controversy
as presented by either party, Will be
In suit to reform an in
surance policy the court correctly Or
dered payment of the amount due on
the policy after IL was reformed. In
n suit for infringement of patent
right,the court correctly denied recov-
cry of the money stipulated under u
contract for tho use ola patent. \ de-
cree for payment of rent, though the
had clearly a remedy for
the recovery of same was correct. An
to stay the sale of property
under deed of trust having been dis
solved by the district court, that court
rendered judgement FOR tho
money secured by the deed, though
there was no plea in reconVention or
prayer for same. The district court hav-
ing, by injunction, acquired jurisdiction
of u cause originally cOgnizable before a
Justice of the peace, should retain IL to
adiudicato all the matters in controversy
rs presented by either party. Affirmed.
COURT OF APPEALS.
Alexander VS.. the state; from Wood
county. Appellant prosecutes this APP
peal from conviction for assault with
intent to murder Al. Banyon, for which
a penalty of three years Imprisonment
was assessed. There is no statement of
facts contained in this record, and rs the
questions raised on tho record are all
such as can only be considered and de-
termined on statement of facts, these
questions cannot be considered by this
court. Affirmed.
Richardson VS.. the state; from Hen
ierson county. Defendant was tried
and convicted of the theft of pistol,
par OF pants and watch, belonging TO
one Holloway, for which a penalty of
five years Imprisonment in the peniten-
tiary was assessed. AS the evidence is
amply sufficient to support the judg-
ment, and there appears no error in the
record of which appellant can justly
the judgment is affirmed.
Miller VS.. the state; from Wood
county. Appellant was convicted of the
theft OF coat from one Jacobs, and his
assessed at two years i'm
in the penitentiary. AS the
case is presented to us on record il must
be affirmed, there being no statement of
facts or bill of exceptions in the record,
and in their absence no error appeal
affirmed
Howard VS.. the state; from Smith
county. Appellant was convicted of an
assault with intent to murder one Carter
Johnson, and his punishment assessed
at two years imprisonment in the peni-
Tertiary. The charge of the court was
on the facts, besides, no e.
ceptions thereto were taken. There was
no evidence on which appellant could
demand a charge as TO manSlaughter,
and the court correctly refused to give
such charge. Affirmed.
Rounduee VS., the State; from Titus
This is an appeal from con-
victon for false packing of a bale
of cotton, for which a fine of $40
was assessed. The record contains no
statement of facts nor bills of exceptions,
that can he considered by this court.
and the Indictment being sufficient and
no error being apparent of record the
Judgment must be and is affirmed.
Jackson vs.. the State; from Smith
county. Appellant was convicted of an
aggravated assault and battery on one
Laura Freeland, and fine OF 500 as
sessed. AS peace officer, acting under
the verbal order OF the mayor
of the town, appellant had no
right to make the alleged arrest. The
charge of the court being found correct,
and the evidence being conflicting, the
verdict of the Jury will not be disturbed,
A ilirmed.
Stewart VS.. the State; from Smith
county. Appellant was charged with
and convicted of the theft of two bales
of cotton and his punishment assessed
at four years in the penitentiary. The
charge of the court and the evidence
supports the verdict and judS-
ment, and as The questions propounded
by the foreman OF the jury to witness
who bad been recalled, were not en-
copied 10 at the time, they can not now
be considered. Affirmed.
Madison VS.. the State; from Jefferson
county. This case comes before the
court on motion to dismiss, because
there is no final judgment in the record
to the eilecV that appellant be adjndged
to suffer death by being hung by the
neck until he is dead, etc., and the same
not being a final judgment. and not
comp NIuS WIN A'u. -, -, e ''"o
10, Tie motion is granted and the appeal
is dismissed.
Vineyard rs. the State; from Cass
county. Appellant was convicted of an
assault with attempt to rape, one
Amanda Savage, aud his punishment
assessed at two years in the pepeienti-
ary. The indictment is sufficient and
so is tho charge of the courO, and the
evidence. The evide nee excluded on
the trial was neither material or admis-
sible and was correctly excluded. There
is no error apparent oil the record and the
judgment is affirmed.
Griggs VS.. the State; from Cass county.
AppeIlapt was convicted of the muir