San Antonio light. [volume] (San Antonio, Tex.) 1911-1993, 1923-10-25
COURT PROCEEDINGS

Austin, Tex., Oct. g5.-Tho following
proceedings were had in the supreme
Court late Wednesday:
Annllcntions for writs Of error grant
ed: Texas Rice Land Company VS.. Nc
Faddln, Wiess & Kyle Land company
from jefferson couuty; Williams. BurNa
& co. vs. Henderson sounty ct H. Hen
dcrson; la Rue n Barron Co. tai vs.
| u. s. Fidelity s. Guarantee Co. ct all Hen
derson: L. s. Fidelity & Guarantee Co.
ct al vs.. Henderson county ct al, lien
derson; American Surety co. of New
York VS.. I'M county ct al. Ellis, (Cureton.
lC J., not sittIng): Mrs. Lee FELTON, ct al
| VS.. Henry Seeligson ct al. Dallas; Guar
antq Securities 60. VS.. Mrs. NJ. Brown
Tarrant; I. II. Dickson ct al VS.. Johnson
county, Johnson; J: c. Beasley ct al
| Is. Johnson; A. ]. Gibson ct al VS.. Texas
re pht9ffG t'onl' Co, Erat1; ia Anslrus VS.,
Iclty Of Crystal City. Havala: i. II. Tan
her We. Fred J. Imle, Hidalgo.
Applications for writs OF error refused;
NJ A. You7gblood vs.. J. II. Ball ct al
| Taylor: per curiam: The charge or the
court OIL discovered peril was excepted
| to for want of pleading and EVIDENCE ana
an examination of the record shows that
| there was no substantial evidence of dis
COY cred peril. Therefore we VIII not dis
turb the judgment OF the Court Of Civil
Appeals rendering judgment instead OF
ordering n remand to the District Court.
], T.. Moulton VS.. Lizzie Glasscock De-
Co. VS. s. 4. Blewett. Denton; note per
curiam: The securities on the supersedeas
bond are not complaining OF the action
of the Court of Civil appeals in entering
the judgment against them. TT. w. q
r. @. Ry Co. VS.. Corrie Jean Woodward,
Tarrnnt: Caddo oil & Refining CO., of
Louisiana vs.. Texhrkana Pipe Works,
Bowie; J. II. jackson VS.. T.. b. Sayles ct
al. Tarrant; w. g. Walters ct al vs.
CITY of San Antonio ct al. Bcxar; 9. 6.
Paxton w. Paxton & Evans. Tariant;
J. r. SturroclS & Lille Sturrocl5 (William
! Henry James ct all vs. Charles Robert
| James (by Gdn... Bexar.
AnniIca tions dismissed for want or Jur-
isdiction: r. A. Tharp VS.. II. +. Ruff.
| Henderson: Mrs. L. l.. Clark ct al vs.
| city of Athens ct al, Henderson; Mag
nolia Petroleum co. VS.. Corsicana Iom-
press Co, Navarro: John II. Broocks vs.
| Holland. Texas. Hypoteck Bank, Jeffcr-
SOM I. +. Hewitt VS.. A. p Mays. county
Judge ct al Navarro; Carrie y. Adams
| W.. A. n. Adams ct al Jefferson; Fer
curiam: We do not think the Court OF
| Civil Appeal sintended to hold that there
was error in excluding the testimony or
Elmo willard, set out in bill OF cNcep-
lions No. IL ]. Il. Cartman ct nj vs..
T.. NJ. Henderson. Henderson: Tom Woa-
yer VS.. w. B. Taylor. Henderson; Mrs
I.ora White ct nj VS.. j. u. CookteN'
Navarro: G. u. jackson ct al w. Zeph
| Anelin ct al. Limestone; John W. Murchi-
son vs. Boley Tindel ct al. Henderson;
Allen J.. Marshall ct nj VS. city of Dallas
| ct nj, Dallas; Bonnie l.. Bctgeron e. al
VS. Security National Bank Of Dallas, Dali
| las; ]. ID. Smith vs.. Grover Wood, van
Xandt; city of Gainesville VS.. il. q.
| Head and Southern Surety Co, Cooke
". s. Hillcocl VS.. George W. Medley,
Tarrnnt; ole o. Haverbekken VS.. Coryell
county ct al. Coryell; Fort Worth Belt
Ry. CO. VS.. +. e. Davis ct uN., Tarrant;
Mrs. W. b. Taylor vs. II. ID. McGec. Tar
rant: Nancy White Monroe. admx. vs..
Il ~ T..
bryant VS.. s. l.. $. W. ny. co. Of Texas.
Bowie; Mary u. Daggett VS. Farmers Ma
tional Bank ct nj, Erath.
Causes withdrawn from Commission of
Appeals and set for November II: John
w. Gordon VS.. Jack V. Buster. Deaf
Smith; G. G. & s. +. Ry. Co. VS.. Charles
l.. Conlcy tux. Montgomery; in the
latter case all orders heretofore made are
| set aside.
Motion to cite for contempt postponed
and reset for october 81: J. A. Herring
ct al vsh Houston National Exchange
Bank. Harris.
Motion tn advance granted: 4. II.
Kirby vs. Dilworth & Marshall, Tarrant.
Motions for rehearing of applications
overruled: Rose Mfg. Co. VS.. Western
Union Tel. CO.. Dallas: James c. Davis,
agent. VS. T. 5. Adkins. Wood.
Motion TO dismiss application granted:
Mrs. l.. l.. Clark ct al VS.. City OF Athens,
Henderson.
Motions for rehearlng submitted: Mum
phrcy- Mcxia Co. ct nj VS. J. L. Cannon
ct al. Limestone; The Texas Co. ct al
VS.. Nelson Davis ct al, Brazoria; Steph-
ems county ct al VS.. Mid-Hansas Oil &
Gas Co., stephens; CCurcton. c. J.. not
sitting; G. ]. Thomson ct Ell VS.. NJ. +.
Ham ct ux, Stephens.
The following cases were decided ny
the Supreme Court on reports Of the COM
missio nof Appeals:
Judgments of Court OF Civil Appeals
and District Court reversed and cause
remanded 20 District Court: Houston Oil
Company of Texas ct nj VS. Edith l..
Niles ct al, Hardin; Eastern Texas Flee
trio Co. VS.. Dora Baker ct nj, Jefferson;
Southern Traction Co. VS.. J. A. Wilson.
McLennan.
Judgments Of Court OF Civil Appeals
and District Court reversed and judg-
ment rendered for the state for taves due
and foreclosure and for costs: State Of
Texas vs. !. J. SetteEast Jr ct al. Harris.
Judgment Of Court or Civil Appeals re-
manding cause affirmed: L. NJ. Marsh
burn ct al VS.. Sidney Stewart ct al,
Taylor.
Certified questions answered: W. +.
Duncan vs. The United Mutual Fire In
surance Co. Montague: National Cattle
Loan Co. VS.. X. Q. Ward, Harris.