Fort Worth gazette. [volume] (Fort Worth, Tex.) 1891-1898, 1893-05-08

set aside during the term eutctunily uHhH.
fprred the case 10 the district court aud
Tint the Jurisdiction Of that court became
original and any order made IN the county
court therein Subsequent to the adjourn
uenf OF thar torn which would have the
effect Ia deprive the district court Of such
Jurisdiction was without jurisdiction In the
county court aud was Therefore q nulliiy.
smith Bnl- "a Unr,lin o. Texas 12U;
vs. KrrfOOt. z. A. G., q. AZ: ] c. A. g. G.
b27. We believe that the failure OF the
county clerk to perform his duty by strik
Ing the case from the docket OF his court
and transmitting the papers TO the district
court could not have the effect to retain
jurisdiction after the entry OF the order OF
We are therefore OF opinion that the
court below erred In holding either of the
judgments under which appellees claim To
be valid and IN rendering Judgment In their
favor and that Its Judgment should here
fore be reversed and Judgment here render
ed In favor Of appellant for the land in
controversy with costs. and 1t Is 80 ordered.
HEAD.
Associate Justice.
Stephens. Justice not sitting.
W T. C'abelI Of NJ nnpellres ADpeai
from the district court Of Nolan county.
rnNCt trstoNS
NpNNbuSloNS'
judgment Ia the district court ot Nolan
county against y. ]. Fritz and Son for
SlloO foifclOslng an attachment Hen on
what was known as the Fritz stock OF
horses ranging In Nolan aud adjoining cOun-
Ties. In January 1855. this stock Of horses
was sold BY the sheriff OF Nolan county
uuuef an aims order Of sale issued upon
snid judgment: At which sale appellant be-
came the purchaser, his bid OF $500 being
credited on the Judgment. The sherr ex-
eclted TO him a bill or sale which was ac-
knowedged and placed upon record. The
sale took place before the courthouse door
uhu me pruceedlngs seem 20 nave Deen
regular Except thai The tcln0wledgment
OF the hlll or sale appears not nave been
aitcSled by an oliciai seal. Ihe attach
mcnl levy and foreclosure sale were made
under those sections OF The revised statutes
range levy aud sale. About the last Of
April or frsi Of May next after this sale
appellant gathered and rounded up said
stocS VI horses. branded the colts. aud then
turned them loose upon Tho range again there
after controlling and nihnagtug them us he
ala tile rost Of his stock running upon the
range IN Noyemher. 1855. some forty or
execution against H. j. FTitz and son ON a
Judgment ~ favor Of the Kansas Nanufac
turing company. THIS levy began as
range levy. but under IL The horses wcr,.
rounded III mud hprded hy the deputy mar
slIul and delivered at the sale Ia The pur-
chaser. This suit WAS brought hv utDel.
liant ngainst the marshal and the 1,r,,ties
on his official bond Ia recover the value ~
the horses so SEIZED aud converted Upon
IA ia
turn verdict for defendants an tLs itound
that plnlnun had fnllpl 10 prove lille 10
or Possession or the horses described in
hts petition Appellant assigns the giving
opinion that The assignment must at be a'v sus.
famed We gather from the record. there
being no brief for aPpellces, that Tie Tile
ground that the sale unlcr the Foreclosure
was not sufficient 10 pass title, without
nelpg followed 6E a prolrrly acknowledged
q ~ No. o. ne revised statutes Black
Panhandle Natlonai bsnk W. ' I Fmsr q, '9 9s
Texas, 40 ii IL held tbst I'D. NH, 20
tile stntnte IL AMY an,iIc,iJs ,,,,, ~ ~, ,tv ~
depends alone upon lie Viii Of via II ih as
long been fine ruie tnsi an n,,.,,ti ~ nus
Judicial sale unf nnlv ,ics ro, N h,, "
upon The cunvcynnec rx@rt,J br XXX o, aioue
but n Otherwise regular Inc ia, w,t 49,.
even without fornni conveyance. Miller
Cooke ~ Texas. Az. Wa nre ~, ont,in,,
that article i5gt ia applical,In aIa, opi ~,
a voluntary 1ispos ION W the owner Of stock
Il has M application In an sSc.. MI '" ~
judicial sale ~ surh autn,ois Min "i.VH s, ~
provided for IN article g2n3 ogid AMI .gSiu
session as pnrcbaser mnaerp nv Inu s Ine'h poS.
pnle of the hnrs,g IN vniI t 'n hI ~ V',iusS
those aftorward seized Nv th,. LIZ I n,ViuuinS
session brrs,sn" 'i ~, ~ aS9Gtire UTE and pos
for want of nm ncknn,yIsi ,,r ~ or sale'
was not, and coniH nj H.. ''y ,'r uiuer seii'
tered. For "A ronstrnrtin, ~ t."pvsN regis.
cited see gunfer Of al rs Va VIZ Ws!Slss lust
5DS ~ - 'ou"' ~ lehas'
1t follows from those c,noin.,,,,. a.,
,.s ,,s,s s,',,t ",u1t ue reversed and the
STEpIIifpMNsS Fl"'
Assnciot, t,,.,,.
'ustlee'
Iogcnb stri,tt,,d =, ii ,,
- uerJs.i,t,u ~ ~" appeiiahis' vs. \.
IRON, TIyior count, a. "ppeHeeS' Appeal
ma sutt ,r,y t,,,,,t.
land against Il r ilarIwicIe saw, nnd S, ,h
ginning under the Inter Ia gnn"@I a NJ.
ms deed executed 10 lIni.lvirts ,nnv.,,
lug certain real estate nni In n,ry,a,,'i
purchase hy him nj exr,mtion sai' VI
The rutief nIaypl for Vy,s al, H., au.,..,,
ground that tue sale was fraudulent in tLat
an execution sal. lad In " liz, ,,y, p1{las ~
clients and thai tie prlec uail by hi,o oi Ms n,s
grossly inadequate 10 liz vain, ~ tin INN MAJ
peaicd an ouistanahr tlts IN 1' nSs t mls,,ers
Str,cldand In support az tbis rI .'l@a ,s
relied upon a decd made, before ,hS ,n Teay
luton ~ the snlt by Joseph Strickland and
Tgs XXX c9s,sigsgai2n % Sl514 pail. 70 tits
Z Esabrh sttieEiHSl' V Ins ey Snat Ne deed
ont confederation 1..f ali l..ta 49, 1