El Nuevo mexicano., 1917-01-04
OF INTEREST 70 ATTORNEYS is
SYLLABUS OF OPINIONS RENDERED
BY SUPREME COURT ON SATURDAY

Following IL the syllabus Of opin-
ions handed down by the supreme
court Saturday and briefly noted in
Saturdays New Mexican:
State of New Mexico, ok rel, Placl-
do Baca y Baca, ct all, appellants, ys.
Board of County Commissioners, ct
al, appellees. No. 1902, Guadalupe
county.
On the 10th day of August, 1914, an
election was held in the town Of Santa
Rosa, under the local option statutes
at which election 1870 votes were cast
in all, the election officers certifying
to AZ votes in favor Of prohibition and
SS votes against prohibition. This ac-
ton was thereafter instituted in the
district court to enjoin the county
clerk, couny treasurer and board OF
county commissioners from issuing H.
censes for the sale of intoxicating IL
quors within the said town upon the
ground that by a Of certain iIle-
gal votes having been cast at said
election the true result had not been
declared or ascertained by the election
judgment. and that the actual result
Of said election was in favor OF pro-
hibition. Upon issues being Joined
Judgment was entered In the district
court for appellees, from which judg-
ment this appeal was prosecuted.
This cause was first presented for
consideration in this court upon a mo-
ton to strike the bill OF exceptions
from the files ON a number Of grounds,
and in an opinion handed down on
Jlne IS, 1916, this bill of exceptions
was struck from the files.
Judgment Of the court below affirm
ed.
Syllabus BY the Court
1. In this Jurisdiction, by reason Of
Section 41S5, Code 1915, there, are no
terms Of court except for Jury trials,
and a Judgment which disposes of all,
or one or more, of the separate and
independent causes OF action in the
case becomes a final Judgment upon
its rendition and entry, in the sense
that the same passes rom the future
control of the court, and except al
default Judgment (Section, 1927, Code
1879, and an i~rregularly entered
judgment (Section 1920, Code 1879,
and except for such purposes as all
courts always retain control over
their judgments.
2. It is a fundamental rule of ap-
practice and procedure that
IN appellate court will consider only
such questions as were raised in the
court below.
Opinion by Justice Hanna, Chief
Roberts and Justice Parker
,oncurring.
People We. orekar
George WI. People, appellee, VS..
John Orekar, appellee. Mo. 1883, Col
county.
On motion for rehearing, denied.
Syllabus BY the Court
1. Where there is substantial evil
lence to support the verdict or judg-
nent, orsthe findings or the court, fur
her inquiry in this court will not be
lad.
2. The general rule Is that parol
cannot be received to con-
radict, vary, add to or subtract from,
he valid written terms of a contract.
8. II a written instrument fails to
tate the entire consideration, the
anne may be shown, and If the con-
liberation stated is IN ambiguous
or If 1t is clear that the whole
consideration is not stated, the true
onsideration may be proved.
A. Oral evidence Is admissible for
he purpose of impeacning a written
instrument for false or fraudulent rep
e~sentations upon the faith Of which
be contract was entered into.
IS. The pleader is not required to
nticipate defenses.
Opinion by Justice Hanna, Chief
ustice Roberts and Justice Parker
oncurring.
Original opinion handed down Oct. 1
/, 1915.
EugenIo Romero Case
State ex rel Cunningham, ct al, ap-