The Houston daily post. [volume] (Houston, Tex.) 1886-1903, 1897-01-30
1IiI,T COURT DECISIONS
s1''''' I he Latest Sitting
,,,,E,Gp BY THE SUPREME COURT
49,. suit Against Win"
=. . '.r'' A..~erea in d r,"."f OF
''' q. coant,-o'"er Cases

1e sDf ',,,erAIN. executor, vs.. H.
n =. Mnsi .Nn WIFE. suit on certain
stokes not notes and to foreoiose an al.
prcnisso's ,r's lien on the homestead OIL
legged 'enuV wife. from Travis county
Stokes ,...,"rs,c,--Revcrsed and remanaeu
ial ,., ~ In error. as executor OF but'sr
r ".srs deceased. sued H. G. Stokes ana
!, van :, two promlssory notes Tor SS'o'.'
Wv .,sred by the defendants ana SOUGHT
N'a' p an alleged lien on a certain
'. !, ,he city Of Austin which constitute
" .,.s,ead of Stokes and wife at the
w 49, notes were given. Verdict aud
. \. we're rendered against stokes On
I, q Mates. but against the plain'lif IN error
NJ lien. which Judgment was al
..sss nv the court Of civil appeals
n. only question presented is whether
=, tho incon,royerted evidence showed
-, pu,ler II. Waters was subrogated to
A. ,srdor's lien Oh the lot in question,
!, ube,ber or not the trial court erred
,s,nsinr TO instruct the jury. What
~ iucontroyerted evidence was is sur
va =, =. .s,..,.a ,,,, tho aytrprts from the
Totally n'u u,eu ai,or he,ow
usHs ,pny ~, n,aintiff in error to have
" ehuu. r,,,arsed for the failure of
~ uusn .'an. y, civc tho charge request
u u.ai ! .vn m,,st establish the follow
y .ae .,,ians.
ltw ra., ~ da,craonts, homestead WA
,nas e h,, valid lien and that the
Eunus sarros.r,ed he the notes sued unon
n'Av ~ ~, r,,ir,i,,'s tostato, IN tho de-
w ~s's sar 81 tha n,rnose of discharginu thnt
esaAne ,oI sa' ~, pn' al, n,bich incnn,horeJ
MI si aua . wac in fac, dtsrhareed win
MONEYS ~ ,S', ar not coutroyerted
's''V r r'urj II was intended by the parties
49,, ,he lender should be secured in
u. rsnavment of the money loaned BY a
IL, "ron The ,ot II is claimed by the de-
!plants that the evidence does not sus-
ar tho last proposition to the exclusion
"a oilie,enee o op ,h a. :" ,oS s ,I
a, t,rt hat tbey were given 10 secure a
nrt Of the purchase money of the lot is
sufficient proof oil itself to establish tho
=. ssV,'ea e' Ta .'e exc. p sc 60 ~ 'i'e
Tssrr was not a fact or circumstance
shovn by the evidence in this case which
citrsdicts the legal erect oil the papers
Executed by the defendants. On the con-
nry. all the evidence which bears upon
ls question supports the plaintiffs claim
10 lien upon the land.
Because the trial court erred in refusing
10 give the charge requested by plaintiff.
and because the court of civil appeals erred
ID anlrmlhg tne judgment, the Judgments
q both courts are reversed and the cause
brnlon nv prown
'sn,, vVLoHADO AND SANTA FF
n Ml.MM COMPANY VS.. MILAN
VVAil, certified question in care
from Milan county. Third district-An-
fFered In favor OF Milan county.
The commissioners court of Milan, .o,,r
N bx t,ors- s,..r,o,, ,oa.o.,,.
,i,..a ,,,,,a 'S''u-
1lN apuolic road across the track of the
'ahsay company. and for that purpose con-
demaed strip of land mart M so,a co,,,
| ury's rieb, ~ way No.,
"a .1. veg, ''oni inc ae'ioh OF
sAa 'oOfl In allowing only $50 damages
| w
court. which rendered a similar tndg,aont
Condemned was only $50, but The railway
company contends that on account of ' " ny
establishment OF said public ROAD across ' i,e
,nts It will be compelled TO do er,dina 40
both sides of the track to M, in ' ri, ~,
sutrds; to put in drain mines IN mnt r,
eiossing signboard. etc " f1' UP "
~, me 'Fial court held as matter of law
lid i, WV ,. .aiisay company was not entl-
dsnass 'e'0'eF Tor any of these items of
euestiOn--ls the county ,,o,,a g.,
,sa u, Of expense enumerated above as part
,iI, ,ue compensation allowed by the con.
tsnnsd for publj p'' Hsas property is con-
The county is not ' peou,rsa h, a., ..,...,.,
tuition and laws nj ,h,s sta ny tne eohsti-
isliSay company the items gay w 'ne
shlned by 1t as stated aho,o nanInst,
Statutes article 44s5I '"cN'soa
ltesn not be held mndor g..
va, The county must comranss 1870 .t cite
The law required !, y, ',iose things which
erly arose out Of The ,o no. although that
usnway was laid out ,rross va. ~ .ne county
opinlon by Brown ~ 'As inc railroad
nr,
GULF COLORADO Avn
HALLWAY COMp,nts,p SANTA FE
LAND, suit 10 recover d. 10, o. - hoW-
nisay conparx eV I've DAMAGES OF III,
n'taIned by pln,r,,,, personal injuries
s cars from Lampssas V co,, PASSENGER I,,
pka,In WE'VE Sc and remanded.
rad BY ,s defendants end, car, The questions
s 's'- u We're the servants ,%' ~ gs, ,p,.
Vhlsny neyliva., IVA dHts OF inc