San Antonio light. [volume] (San Antonio, Tex.) 1911-1993, 1923-03-29
COURT PROCEEDINGS
In Supreme Court.

Austin, Tex, March ss.--The follow
Ing proceedings were had in the su-
preme court Wednesday:
Applications for writs OF error grant
cd: A. l. Nelson VS.. L. c. Downtain
ct al. Eastland; City OF Fort Worth
vs.. Fort Worth Acid Works. ct al, Tar
rant: Keystone Pipe and supply Com
pany VS.. Liberty Refining Company ct
al, EsstIand; American Railway Ex-
press Company VS.. Lloyd Grlce, by Next
Friend, FL Paso: George S. Allison and
Sons VS.. John T. Hamic ct al, Pros.
Applications for writs Of error refusde:
Ben G. Jones and Company VS.. $. A.
Philquist ct al, Travis; Z. d. Akers vs..
Mrs. Emma Hanscom, stephens; a. ".
Bittick vs. City OF Ell Paso. FL Paso;
City Of El Paso VS.. Tri-state Associa-
tion OF Credit Men 81 al. FL Paso. F.
r. Hunter, Independent Executor etc.
vs. Estate of Martha A. McHattCI ct
w. Y. Howse. FL Paso; John Jawn ct al
VS.. Rod Drake ct all. Tyler.
Applications dismissed for want Of jur-
isdiction; A. r. Craven ct al. vs.. Bob
Buchanan ct al. McLennan; Rose Amelia
Bryan ct al. VS.. Texas Life Insurance
Company ct al, McLennan; James G.
Davis. Agent. VS.. Willis Christmas, Bell:
st. Louis B.. and NJ. Railway Company
ct al. vs. s, r. Lane, HidaIgo; r. z.
Butcher We. Margaret \. Muely ct al.
Nueces: q II. Anderson vs.. J. T. Bisch-
off and ]. r. Monroe. El Paso; NJ. s.
Polk ct al. VS.. Richard Carey ct al,
jefferson.
Motions for rehearing OF causes over
ruled: County OF Harris vs.. John II.
\ CROKER ct al. Harris Sustain Stephens
VS.. II. c. House ct al, Harris; ID. c.
Trigg ct al vs.. J. VI. shelton. Potter
Walker u. Hines. Director General, vs..
| W. &. Baker, Grimes: city OF Waco VS..
Amicabie life Insurance Company, Nc
Lehman.
Motions for rehearlne Of applications
overruled: Equity Mutual Fire Insur-
ance Company ct al VS.. &. II. Harrell,
ct al, Angelina Tony McGrady ct al.
VS.. Lee Clary, Motley.
| Motions for leave TO file petitions for
mandamus granted: J. Il. Anderson vs..
J. I. Robinson. COMMISSIONS. ct al;
Howard Mcdaniel ct al vs.. Hon. George
lie. O'Bricn. District Judge.
| Motions for leave to file petitions for
mandamus overruled: David Karin ct al,
vs. Joseph Murray. Clerk.
Motions for rehearing submitted: q.
| O. Haverbekken VS.. Coryell County ct al.
| Coryel; Fowler Commission Company vs..
Charles Land and Company. Nueces: city
| OF Waco VS.. Texas Lilo Insurance Com
| pany McLennan.
| Agreed motion to set aside judgment
\ Of court OF civil appeals and TO dis
miss case submitted: Dallas Power and
Light company vs. b. W. Darlington ct
al, Dallas.
| The following cases were decided today
| by tho supreme court on reports or the
commission OF appeals:
! The personal judgment rendered
| gainst l.. A. Quarles by the district
| court and court Of civil appeals Is at
| firmde; otherwise the judgments OF the
district court and court Of civil appeals
are reversed and rendered, as recon-
| mended by the commission OF appeals
l. \. Quarles ct al. VS.. J. W. Conway
| Erath.
The personal Judgment as rendered
against l.. 4. Quarles by the district
| court. as reformed by the court OF ciNll
appeals is affirmed and the judgments
OF the court OF civil appeals and dis
| triot court are otherwise reversed and
rendered as recommended by the com
mission appeals; l.. \. Quarles ct al.
VS.. H. II. Hardin. Erath.
| Judgment OF the court OF civil ap-
peals reversed and that Of the district
court affirmed: ]. J.. GREGG VS.. Hunt
County. Hunt: Oliver Daniels VS.. Pearl
Wight, receiver. Gregg.
| Judgment OF the court of civil ap-
pcals affirm: Pearl Wight, Receiver, vs.
| J. +. Belchcr. Gregg.
The writ of error and application
therefore arc dismissed for want OF jur-
mission OF appeals; j. w. Howard VS..
INSTRUMENTATION Commercial Compa-
| ny ct al. BCXar.
The opinion OF the commission OF ap-
pcasl answering certified questions adopt
ed and ordered certified TO the court
OF civil appeals: J. j. Ellcrd vs.. Keller
| j. Bell ct al, Tarrant.