Fort Worth daily gazette. (Fort Worth, Tex.) 1882-1891, 1890-12-14
SUPREME COURT.
synorses Of Decisions Rendered at the Pres


ct oil. VS.. T. NJ. Hoffman, Jr.. ct al. !:
from Kaufman. l. The interest OF the
children OF first marriage in their
mothers share Of the comnu unity prop
erty cannot be made 10 contribute 70 the
allowances of the widow OF n second mar
rage. [5s Tex. 299; 81 Tex. 453, 46l;
60 Tex. 27l. 2. II is equally true that
the widow mus; have her full allowance
for exempt property not existing III kind,
II the husband . Interest III the estuts Is
of sufficient value to satisfy them. The
widows right to her allowance has
precedence. over the creditors, so far us
rx.end. Vie whole amount Of her al
lowanre for exempt property must be
paid before the creditors can receive
any amount from the husband g share OF
the estate. The Oh lhren can resort, as
against the widow claim for exrm ptions
and allowances, only TO their mother s
share. The creditors may resort TO both
shares, with the difference that US TO the
fret wife's share their claims are supe-
r. or. to those of her heirs, while as to the
husbands snare, they are inferior to
the widows right to allowances.
8. When not affected by a subsequent
marriage the claims of the creditors must
be fully discharged before the heirs of
the first wife can receive ANYTHING. 4.
The widow must have her allowances for
Exempt property before the creditors can
be paid anything out of her share OF her
husbands estate. 5. The interest of the
heirs of the first wife in the estate must
not be diminished to create, or help
create, an allowance for the widow or
second wife. 6. Debts are created with
the understanding aud obligation that
they exist in subOrdiuatiOu 10, and shall
yield In favor of. the widow = allowance
1t is equally well settled that the estate
of the first wife shall not be taxed di-
rectly. OF indirectly, TO provide for such
an allowance. Z. Where the residence
can not be treated as homestead il
should be sold as o.her unexempted
property, the widows allowance being
In lieu Of IA homestead. Reversed and
remanded. Henry, j.
Stuyton, c. j.. coucurs in the reversal
and the questions herein decided save
that he dissents in The holding that as to
the frat wife - shure OF the estate the
rlnms of the creditors are superior to
her children. Judge S,ayion writes no
OF inion. but will do so later
Pullman Palace Car Company vs.. n.
L. Smith; from Kaufman. /. Appellee
and his wife were passengers OF appel
lunts train to Terrell. Texas. They
went to bed. being in the night time, aud
requested to b e walked up in time TO get
off at Terrell. When the train cume to Il
tank about a half mile from Terrell the
train stopped to take on water aud for
other purposes. The servants of appel
liant company rused in and told appellee
and wife, first waking them, that the
train was ut Terrell. Appellee aud wife
hastily arose, and in their haste, partly
dressing, hurried out and alighted.
They had never been to Terrell before
aud did not know the location of the
country. Before they discovered the
mistake the train pulled out. 1t was
about 5 CLOCK III the morning, being
quite dark, also cold, while the GROUND
was damp and muddy, caused by rain
" hirh was falling at the time. The wife
of appellee from the exposure thusa
rnused was i'll for five weeks, while app
peliee lost three weeks from his employts
ment. Verdict for appellee for SIPS.
l. The petition states q Cause of action.
q There was no error in permitting the
of no other cause of her sickness
than the exposure caused by
being left at the tanS. 8. There WINS
no error In permitting appellee TO testify
as to the salary he was getting. he Ill
legiug loss of time In his petition. 4.
I here was no error in admitting in evil
dence statements of the wife
of appellee to her physician
hi nf HOY hoin oil
Us they were, 10y the physician in con-
nertion with his opinion as to the rause
of her sickness. 5. Where charge is
abstrartIy erroneous. yet il same is I'M
called for by the evidence. and does not
tend TO injure the party complaining, we
will not reverse on such ground. 6.
The obligation 20 awake and notify pas
seucprs Ia time for them to prepare to
safely and comfortably leave the train,
At the point of their destination, is di-
rectly involved in the contruct for the
use of the sleeping berth. Affirmed.
Henry, j.
American Legion of Honor vs.. T. d.
Powell; from Marion. /. In this case
transcript wns filed here September %,
1890. The assignments of error were
died in the lower court October | 1890.
Held: Because the assignment Of errors
was filed after the transcript was filed
In this court, same will be stricken out
and briefs thereon can not be consiG-
cred. 2. An assignment that "the'court
erred in rendering judgment for plaintiff
upon the evidence adduced on th- trial.
because the Judgment is contrary to law
and not supported by the evidence, IL
too general, and can not be considered.
Affirmed. Canes, j.
A. n. Evans ct al. vs.. Schneider s
Davis; from Ellis. /. Evans and Beau-
champ were sued. the first as the maker
aud the latter as the IN
iorser of u vendors lien note. Dixon
was made party as subsequent pur-
chaser of the land sought to be fore
closed, aud no Judgment for money was
asked against him. Judgment against
all the defendants for amount of note
aud foreclosure of lien. Held: The judg-
ment is reformed as TO Dixon and at
frm&d rs TO other parties. Affirmed.
Gaines, j.
W J. Cannon s. Co. VS.. LIttletield s
Bro from Morris. L. A party had no
power TO ratify the act OF his agent So Us
to effect arppllpes' right after the levy
had been made. nor was the aimis ion of
his agents authority evidence against
,hrm. 9. The remark of the court on
beng asked TO instruct the jury to find