The Houston daily post. [volume] (Houston, Tex.) 1886-1903, 1896-12-23
THE HIGHEST COURTS.

case from Clay county. second district.
+, Dismissed.
AS the questions are now presented. we
are of the opinion that we should decline
TO exercise the jurisdiction of determining
them. We apprehend that the statute au-
thorizing certificates OF dissent from the
courts of civil appeals to this court con-
templates that. in certifying the point or
points of dissent. the court shall state dis
tinctly the very question or questions upon
which the members OF the court are not
in accord. Article 1oi1 of the Revised
Statutes requires the clerk Of the court OF
civil appeals TO send up IA certified copy
of the conclusions OF law and fact found
by the court and the questions of law upon
which there is a division" This may be
construed to mean that the clerk is to send
up the questions as stated by him, but 1t
Is obvious that 1t was not intended TO de-
| volve SO important function upon the
clerk. We think the provision should DO
| construed as Ii 1t read: "A certified copy
| OF TIE conclusions of law and fact as found
| by the court and OF the questions OF law
| upon which there is a divis on" meaning
u certified copy of the questions of law.
| rms implies that the questions are to be
formulated: and hence it is 10 be inferred
That the questions should be distinctly
| stated by the court. An order requiring
tHe c.ltil,caioh OF thc questions provided
, ~ states lhe questions. is practically Ger
ull.a.e IN substantial conformity TO tue
statute. But we think. whatever form be
resorted to. the order or certificate as the
case may be- should set forth separate |
ana IN detail tho points upon which the
Iutmbers of the court are divided In opin
iop. lhere u.s. IN our opinion. no difference
r.S tNrt.ts tF..;,,
.loh under article 1913, K. s, and cert- |
lylhg dissent under articles lOio loil
anu IVA, r. :. but the certificate under
n.t.eIe luiS must be made by the cniet |
!us'ioe, WINE uhder the articles last cited
the ,,. esr.ilcate is TO be made by the court
=, ui'seren, rue was applied IN case of dis
justice might be tho dissenting judge. We
uo up, leel tnat we are authorized. at |
I'ast III complicated case ike TINS, TO as |
certain oy contrasting the two opinions, |
MA a.. rs w. mr. caiieq upon 10 deer
appeals to state tho onestions tha csr,is,. |
cate will be dismissed Because the certifi.
Vale was demanded IN this case by one of
ougb, oeoj, r., ''1p o, H.. W. en'mh lne court
TO conform IN tho statute ~ "
Opinion by Gaines. c. j.
~, vs., ~ a. - A"HS' ri Al. Ger
,,,'. y. nIsS,', III c"se from iarraht
ION" ulSuIc'' dismissed
me cerotcate OF dissent in this case
is subject TO the same objections as that
passed upon tbi, ,a,. T., 49,, - -, ,,I !
We Ct,r =, ,,a.,,.,s.,.
Missed VI iie'' 'e''a' II is therefore dis
||,nio,, h.. c,,,
N"'4''' ny 'a'nes' = D.
j. H. CIAssrN vs t1rvpv rr >,r~nop,
,r an NIA'S n vs. ttENhl hl-MENpORF
~ 81 .lu''Oi ior reneaTlhs IN case
n,an,,,,nS COUNTY, foufth district
u'e'
ms cause came to us on a certificate OF
dissent.
The court of civil ANNALS bo,d tho, ,,oro
VI 'Ni "pleals heiu 'hat there
was no error III 'he judgment OF the trial
court nut ruled also that the appellees
should he allowed two DAYS within which
TO file remittitu, ror cer,atr ao,a.
,.,o.,.,r.,, T., an a'''"ee'