The Dallas daily herald. [volume] (Dallas, Tex.) 1873-1887, 1885-06-22

NNlNSu III EOrLSOn VS., AltOrQs where
the sale u land WAS made before the
WAS instituted to set aside
che orders and proceedings had in d.
County, o purchaser without notice of
the facts which questioned the juris-
diction of that court, or subsequent
purchaser without such notice or
knowledge of any fact which would
lead him TO knowledge of such facts,
If he psid valuable consideration,
would be protected IS an Innocent
purchaser. The County Court having
Jurisdiction of the subject matter of
administration Of the estate, Its
confirmation Of a sale made
collateral proceeding where the record
does not affirmatiyelv show that its
jurisdiction did, not attach. A pur-
chaser is not bound to look further
back than to the order OF the court, but
he must inquire at his peril to see that
the court had jurisdiction to make the
order, Reversed and remanded.
Haughton & Robertson VS.. d. G.
Lindsey; from Brown County. De-
lsney, J. Adopted. The only question
in this case being one as to the good
faith, etc, of appellee OF the goods
levied on, and this being purely Il
question Of fact es to the credibility of
tho witness which was for tire Jury to
determine, and the evidence being
very contridictiug and there being
evidence to support the judgment rem
dered, it will not be disturbed. AT.
frmed.
Mary Carroll ct al. vs.. w. S. Boothe
ct al, from Gonzales County. Watts,
j. Adopted. This suit was brought
by Mary Carroll, for herself and as
next friend OF Lewis Carroll, a minor,
against their former guarnian, O'Con-
nor, and w. s. Boothe, the appellees,
to secure by certiorari the revision
and correction OF certain sales of their
property made by O'Connor under
orders of the County Court and con-
firmed by said court. Three sales
were alleged sggreGating sos acres,
which were alleged to have been
worth at the time of the sale $500 and
which were sold to Boothe for 1909.
The writ of certiOrari was granted,
and upon a hearing the court sustain,
cd general and special exceptions and
dismissed the cause. from which iudg-
ment this appeal ia taken. Held:
Proceedings had in o guardianship
may be removed by centrorari from
the County to the District Court and
there revised and corrected ut any
time within two years after such pro.
ceedings we're had upon the applica-
ton Of any person interested in the
guardianship. Any person laboring
undor disability has two years In |
which to make the application.
In such cases the statute requires |
that the application shall distinctly |
set forth the error sought to be re- |
vlsed. lRev. Stats, Arts. 200 and 29D. |
Here the sole ground stated in the APP |
ptlcation and the writ is that the land |
was sold by the guardian for less than |
lta actual value. 1t was alleged that
Inc sales were made pursuant to |
.he orders Of the County |
by the court. There ia no |
that any irregularity occur
rcd in the proceed ngs resulting in the |
sale, nor that the same were not fairly |
made and in conformity with the law.
is II alleged that these proceed
ngs were in any manner tanned with |
rand.
II is provided by the statute chat at
any ttmo after the expiration of five
lays from the fling of the report OF
ial0 but at regular term the court
nay enquire into the manner In which
he sale was made and hear evidence
n support OF and against the report.
md IL satisfied that the sale was fairly
made and In conformity with law the
curt shall cause to be entered upon
he minutes decree confirming the
ale. (Rev. Stats, Art. 2 593.)
From this it will be seen that lib
,ral discretion is vested in the court in
.cung upon reports of sale, 30 far as
he amount offered for the property is
The essential inquiry az
o whether the sale was fairly made,
md in the manner, at the time and az
he law directs.
AT judicial sales the great object is
o secure fairness in the sale, and open
nd uniettered competition among
'idders; and 1t is woll-known uthat
ven the property rarely commands
IS full value.
Here the dlsproportion betweenlthe
mount received and the actual value
y the property, IA alleged in the APP
'lioatlon, is not such as to constitute
violence OF fraud in the sale, nor is
here such an abuse of discretion
hown upon the part of the court I'm
the sale, in respect 10
he amount for which the property
old, as would contribute sufficient
ause for reversing and correcting the
proceeding. There being no sufficient
round stated In the application for
he certiorari TO sustain the proceed
az, there is no error in the payment
nd IL Is affirmed.
i. Il G.. N. X. r, VS., Mandy l.. Hes
pr, from TraYis County. Watts, j.
dopted. When one accepts employ
lent from railroad, he assumes all
he risks ordinarily incident TO such
mployment, and the company is not
able TO him for Injuries
esulting from such assumed risk.
Tut If the injuries are
ccasioned by super.added risk result
NJ from the negligence of the COM
any,or It's Immediate representations,
hen liability would exist, tor which
@ would DO entitle to recover, unless
D some way he contributes TO the in.
lry by failure upon his part 10 exer.
lse such reasonable care rs the oc-
asion requires. In accepting the EN-
ioyment the omploye not only as
umes the risks ordinarily incident 10
hepartlcular service, but he also as
umes that no has tho capacity 10 un-
erstand the nature and extent of the
aTViCe and the rpuuigita ability 10 no.,