San Antonio light. [volume] (San Antonio, Tex.) 1911-1993, 1923-03-07
COURT PROCEEDINGS
> In supreme Court.

Austin. Tex. March s.-The following
proceedings were had in the Supreme
court today:
Petitionsf or writs Of error granted
II. B. .Galbraith vs.. F. y. Bishop. Cam
cron county: Producers OIL Company VS.
clyde Daniels, Clay; L. J.. johnson vs..
j. l.. NeWberry. Taylor.
Applications refused: Western Union
! Telegraph Company Ys. Seguin Farmers
| Union DIN Company, Guadalupe; Texas
Electric Railway VS.. +. w Blank Inn.
Applications dismissed for want OF
jurisdiction: Pittman Harrison Com
pany vs.. Houston Bag and BaGgius
Company, Harris; Citizens Loan and m
Nestment Company vs.. Frank Young
liemphill: First National Bank OF
McAllon-Ns VI. J.. Smith. Hidalyc: Equity
Mutual Fire Insurance Company ct al
vs.. G. u. lIaTrell ct al. Angelina; VI. I.
! Holland vs.. W. c. Belcher Land Mort
gagiug Company. Tarrant.
Motion to dismiss application grant
! CD: Pittman x Harrison Company VS..
Houston Bag and Bagsing Company,
Motion 70 re-tax costs granted: First
National Bank Of Amarillo vs.. Mamie
Rush. administrators. Potter.
Motion 10 correct judgment dismissed
/. =. Balm ct al Ns. Mrs. Z. II. Coats
| Ell al. Harnes
Motions FOR rehearing Of causes over
ruled: Frank X. Bowles executor. ct nj
VS.. F. j. Bryan, Dallas: Frank Il
| Dallas: II. A. Long ct al VS. VI. +. Mar
| tin, Wichita; Texas Electric Railway
| vs.. G. $. Grccuhill. Hill.
Motions for rchearing Q; applications
oNerruled: Dempsey Oil Company Ltd,
| vs.. Paul W. Torrans. Marion: John XII
gore We. Hopkins County Levee Improve
mont District. Hopkins: A. 7. Eiesto VS.
| Held Brothers, Inc, Grimes.
Motion. TO dismiss cause submitted
and granted: FAINT Milling Company rs.
Charles 4. Baughmsn, commissioner
| (msndamusl.
Motion for leave tof lie petition FOR
nandamus granted as o. date January
II. 1929: @. @. Nesbitt ct al VS.. Hon.
7. H. Conner, chief justice, et al.
Motion for writ OF certiorari sub
mitted: Brock Wslker ct al VS.. Ola
Fields ct al. Kaufman.
Motion 10 postpone consideration Of
motion for rehsaring submitted; Brock
Walker CT al VS.. Ola Fields ct al, hauf-
man.
Motions for rehearing submitted
| Brock walker ct al VS. Ola Fields ct al
kaufman: George W. Armstrong & Com
pany, Inc, VS.. Roy Adair by next friend
Tarrant: Carlisle Rowntree ct al VS.
| Peck Furniture Company, BeXar; Jesse
Lamar VS.. Pacific & santa Fe Railway
| Company et al. Potter; Mrs. T.. Ice
Wright VS.. Federal Life Insurance Com
pany, Dallas: NJ. /. Shugart We. D. H.
Shugart. Milan.
The following cases were decided to-
day by the Supreme court on reports
of the Commission OF Appeals:
Opinion OF tho Commission or Appeal;
answering certified questions adopted
White. Ward & Erwin VS.. +. p. Hager
Dallas.
judgments Of district court and Court
| OF Civil Appeals reversed and judgment
| rendered for plaintiff in error: City Of
Dallas VS.. Il. q. Maxwell ct al. Dallas
Judgment Of the Court of Civil Ap-
peals affirmed: Western Indemnity Com
any vs.. Efiie V. Leonard ct al, Harris
| Ben II. Kelly vs.. southwestern Bell Tele-
phone Company. Bexar
The Judgment Of the Court or Civil
Appeals reversing and remanding the
case affirmed with instructions that the
subsequent trial OF the case be gov
erned by the opinion Of the Commission
or Appeals: Rogers & Adams vs.. j. j.
| l cncaster et al. lll Paso.