The Houston daily post. [volume] (Houston, Tex.) 1886-1903, 1896-06-06


FORSTER; partition suit from Tarrnnt
county. SECOND dis,rict-ludvmcnt OF
trial court affirmed.
Forster sued Johnson for p,rntion nnd
| 90 ,s,a,,,.,, ,,, No. -. ,,,..,,., Nm,
| w '''N'''" We WY ." an "'"N "'" ''''
| interest IN certain lot of land, also to
| recover of johnson n uart of the rents
| 1,ri,.,d ,r,,,, M, ,.o,.,., ,,.... ,..,.,
| N'''''' ''"''' '''' p'Vpe''E' '"r'c ""S
| Judgment Tor plaintin III the trial court,
| hut the udrin.p, was reversed md rem
| dcy,l for a,rnua.,, 49,, .,naa, ., ,,o ,,o,r,
| '' '''''' va "''e''' w '''' ''"'
oil ciV'i appeals
| ,,ss,ss,,, -, ,,. .,,,, , , ,s
| ~ "S "'''"'i """ ~, "'
n9 ,hc D. o w. h"us' during ,nn n,rslna'
| SION ot ~ w House after her death as
| tenant IN common with the rlnnun
| ne u"l"ihi@ni, Johnson, introduced ny
| NNideHcc 'HN dues 10 on' l'oggrtt, u'rt
IRON pogseu 10 Fannie w f'onse, Us
| weii rs the chain of tue from lioEgou TO
n,"nn, 'n' .v'uenS, SHOWING a sac nnu.f
also "A Judgment by which the tue Of
stone; henaricks aud johnson WAS dl-
| vested ont OF them aud vested N House;
w" a "teI mon, hous'oh ana ms seconi
l. II Is nq> disputed that johnson knew
| oi FORSTER claim ANA rsh' 70 the lot.
| and this being true. House could not have
| conveyed to Johnson a greater Interest
| man ne had, whether he undertook to 10
| 30 or not
| az isr",,, ,",,,', =, ''.., -, wv, I'M T.,
! claimed. and j ". Ilous.. were N actual
| aud p"lcenhle possession of thc lot ai the
HIS. .o,',i, ",' a.. u.n,n ~ nm
| under and Nv virtue of IN, SAM, ,itle ma
| claim. the right OF Forster 10 recover HIS
| ,in''c' .''N'r" !" 'up inh, WIZ rS',p
| BURDEN iinnn mo tiarcnIont inhnsnu Ia
show that iho rrrsumptyc title IN Forster
| WIS ''3' " NooH ana shihc''ni 'tir upoh
If i, h., ,,,,,,',.,i,'S ~, ,oh,.o, ,,,, Nm
| dricks Ind "A titlc superior to that of
| i'ons' ana l"rsiw hcfor" the Judgment
! WAS rendered 'n The cause ot stone W
| 'i'hS". lNai t'lr Was 'NtinEuishrp IN
li"m by thr Judgment hni Nfstci IN
| House nnl Forster by the convci nnrc
| from itous" 80 Johnson no greater utter
'St rnui'i pass 'hnn House owned and ne
'phi n"' convey fprs'crs interest IN ihr
f,., ~ NY nu',,S"n '',
in''rt Ia connect hlin WIN the soN'irRhN
u' inc son aud Tor that reason lnil'd 10
iow mat ne h"h a superior iitle 10 thti
or lorS 'sr
me judgment of TN" court of clNil az
lphlh Is fcNrrsrl and the Judgment at the
nm court Is 9inrm"d
~. Y - lilNlN vs.. + q M1ltttlS. dis
'firt IN igc, certificate of dissent IN an
application for man1amus, frm The
court of civil appeals for the Third dis
irie' Dismissed for want OF iursdc
tion
ScDn'y. piainun in this preceding
,..,,,.
u.puRn' sum III 'h' nis,',c' o"n'' on we
fiitN-'Nr1 iud IN, district tot when r"
spond.nt AZ iid,.e, puains, onc Tnhln nnd
~ No., -. ,.,. 60 a.,
''''''
Imprisonment ana mhlirious prosecution
The case resulted in a verde, in favor of
n,a,n,,r a, hIs r,,s. of o,.,io, IN, ,,,.e
..,
IMPRISONMENT. nut IN f"'ot 81 inc "'
icnlants on the !ssuc of malicious prose
,..,., -, - .,,
i"' V'' hH''h'hi lof 'ho amount """'He"
him by the VCrAicr pat nothing "nH siia
~ 10 20 much Of the verdic, az vas IA
.liVnr OF the GofentiAnts. \ new triid w.i> (
gtanlcd thr defendants on the Issue Of
lntsc imprisonment but not ms 10 tie !
olhrr Issue In the ease the court orteiius /
tlat the verdict as to thai should atAni I
INT now verdict should lac returned /
new trial had been granted. 1hoieupon !
the pinlutiff moved "a" court to vet isiir
500 much of the Judgment grauting "a n"w |
;iiai as refused "a new II al upon "a" is-nc |
nat him to proceed To trial anew al thu |
then term upon the whole case mnde by
the pet ton This motion having been
oycrfuled. the plain,'n instituted this pro- |
ceoaing IN tho court OF eva apprnIs
against the Judge OF the trial court 10
whoir case 'rhe writ of naneninua WAS |
granted. ine OF The Judges 1fssrnting The {
points of assent have under the statute.
h'tn certified to this court for urtrTtu ma
'ion.
We are Of the opinion that we are with |
out iurisdiciion oyer tho auesttous and |
that the certificate of dissent should ice
d isfl sscd. The limits of tho lurisd-cti ~! |
OF The supreme CONT are defined INA sect ON |
g. ariirlc ; Of tho constitutions II IN there.
IN provided thai The Jurisdiction of This |
a.urt shall hc rppoiito only oArept IN
ccrtnin speclncI rnscs The excepted ease.
Of originnI Jurisdiction do not concern ms
her. Tho Jurisdiction IL SIN further |
tod .r Inv atis IN
cnsns Of wh IN tl. courts az rlvil appenls
have. appellate Jurisdiction This uroyison
OF the constitution came under ronE!del.s-
lion whom this court WINS called mon to
.pnss ui,on tho question Whether dr NOT
iho legislature had tho uowcr Ia confer
Iur s,iiction uuou mis- couri To ido n |
Question certified for n,lr deternr nat ON lev
tho court Of ojviI nppcnls before nny de
cis, ON hv such cou,i ISL Texas t0jl ON
mai question Nc were or the opinion that
white The Jurisdiction of ing crurt Win
hut few exroptionn. was uppel.lic only