Fort Worth daily gazette. (Fort Worth, Tex.) 1882-1891, 1885-05-14
SUPREME COURT.
Synopsis Of the Decisions Rendered at the
Austin Sitting Of the
Supreme Court.
Made Up From the Full and Official Re-
port of the Rulings and 0pin-
ions Rendered.
complled for tho aazette.

OF interests or rights under patent
to- have the same recorded within
three months after the transfer OF the
same was made will not affect the
validity OF the transfer as to the par
ties thereto. When, as in this case,
the assignor conveys only his indi-
vidusl interest in a patent right, and
that interest is not absolutely defined,
parol or other evidence is competent
TO define that interest. Patent rights
partake of the nature of incorporeal
personal chattels, and ordinarily the
good faith of purchaser cannot in.
vest him with title unless his vendor
was clothed with title. The contract
of assignment in this case did not in
clude an interest previously assigned,
although the same was not registered
as required by statute. Reversed and
remapded.
The Continental InsurauceC Company
vs. Milliken, from Parker county. In
an action against an incorporated
company, when the service il had on
local agent, the officers return must
state that he delivered true copy of
the citation to the agent. The word
Served, " as used in the statute, means
that the act required by law to acquire
Jurisdiction over the person of party
to n suit has been accomplished. The
word service means the particular act
OF the officer by which the copy of the
citation is delivered to the party. The
return in this case is as follows: "Came
to hand the l4th day of June, 1884, at
10 O'Clock, u. M, and executed the
l4th day OF June, 1884, on the
Continental Insurance company by
serving upon A. n. Grant, In person,
its local agent at Weatherford, Par
ker county, Texas, a true copy of this
citation" Held, detective. This
court will not revise the action of the
court below upon a motion to correct
return after the perfection of appeal.
Unless excepted to at the proper time,
this court will not revise the conclus-
ions of law and fact, found by the trial
judge. Reversed and remanded.
Eppstien q Co. vs.. Holmes, Grain
d Co., from Lamar county. If q cita-
ton which was directed to the sheriff
OF one county is shown by the return
to have been executed by the sheriff
OF some other county, the service will
be held defective. Assignees of a
judgment in the lower court are not
the proper parties to writ of error.
but will be bound by decree of this
court. The abandonment of q first
writ of error is not ground for the dis.
missal OF a second, Ii such abandon.
ment does not operate to delay the de-
cision Of the cause in this court. The
motion to strike from the docket pre-
walls.
Meguir, Helm & Co. VS.. Bidwell.
from Parker county. The fact that a
note was executed for an item charged
in an account will not defeat a suit
upon the account If it clearly appears
that the note was not taken in payment
of the debt. A debtors negotiable
promissory note does not amount 10
payment unless that it was intended
by the parties TO have that effect is
made to appear. When the suit ia upon
a current mutual account between
merchant and merchant for, one item
of which the debtor gives his promis-
sorry note Negotiable, not in payment
but ~ an evidence of the debt and 20
be used as basis of edit, limit atom
will run from the cessation of dealinps
and not from the maturity of the noe.
Reversed and remanded.
Strueper vs. Ferris, from Gravson
county. When a party prosecutes an
appeal to higher from q lower oonrt
IN tne name OF another person, with
out his authority or consent. he can ha
held TO answer in damages at the suit
OF the adverse party to the judgment,
10 the amount ofthe actual damages oc-
casioned bY the delay OF the execution
of the judgment OF the court a ouo' or
oy the depreciation of the value OF the
properly pending the appeal. Re-
versed and remanded.
The Texas IL Pacific RAILWAY VIC
Graves, from Parker company. IL
is now settled beyond controversy thst
railway corporation Is liable for the
acts OF its servants done in the cause
Oh the employment In the rightful use
as Wen as the abuse of the authority
conferred upon them by the corpora
uOn' Angel & A. on Corp. Sec. $40.
III Is also well settled that the com.
pahy is liable In Its contract for the
SAFE transportation OF the passenger,
Ior the wrongs aud injuries inflicted
upon MIN by the servants OF the COM
pany,, even though the servants at the
time be acting beyond the scope of
ms actual or implied authority. So, Tex.
100 rms action was for damages
ava a~JbhiVS ihhlNttu Dy AODellAntla
conductor In making an assault upon
the appellee. Appellant pleaded below
that he made the assault under the
impression that appellee was one of
those suspicious characters pointed ont
TO him and that he was in the act of
robbing a fellow-psssenger, and fur.
ther, that he was in the act of drawing
weapon when the assault was made.
But mistake as to these facts ON the
part OF the conductor would not ex
cuse the company or relieve Ii from
liability for actual damages resulting
10 appellee from the wrongful act Of
the conductor. And this would in.
clude all damages resulting as nat
urai consequence from the wrong, in
Guiding mental and physical suffering.
The award OF actual damaves
was authorized. With respect to'ax-
emplary damages, however, the i,idg.
ment cannot be sustained. The rn1e
Is that, unless the malicious acts of the
servant are authorized by the com.
pany, or else ratified or adopted bv n
In some way, the company isnot liable
IN exemplary damages, and tha ay;