Case Name: Able and another v. Bloomfield
Court: Supreme Court of Texas
Jurisdiction: Texas
Decision Date: 1851
Citations: 6 Tex. 263
Docket Number: 
Parties: Able and another v. Bloomfield.
Judges: 
Reporter: Texas Reports
Volume: 6
Pages: 132–132

Head Matter:
Able and another v. Bloomfield.
There is no appeal from a Justice’s Court to the District Court.
Where the court a quo did not have jurisdiction, the appellate court cannot acquire it by appeal. Want of jurisdiction of the subject-matter of the suit will arresta cause at any stage of the proceedings.
Upon an application under the statute (Hart. Dig.,p. 8S2) requiring an affirmance of judgment without reference to the merits, the Supreme Court will look into the record to determine the question whether the District Court had jurisdiction, but hot for the purpose of revis- ' ing any error that may have been committed in the exercise of that jurisdiction.
Appeal from Cherokee. Motion by appellee to affirm without reference to the merits.
(?. A. Everts, for appellee.

Opinion:
Wheeler, J.
This is an application by the appellee Tor an affirmance of judgment under the 7th section of the act of 1850. (I-Iart. Dig., p. 882.)
On inspection of the judgment it appears to have been rendered in a case brought by appeal from the judgment of a justice of the peace, and for an amount not within the jurisdiction of the District Court. That court, therefore, had not jurisdiction to render the judgment which we are asked to affirm. It is well settled that when the court a quo had not jurisdiction, the appellate court cannot acquire it by appeal. It is manifest that this court cannot give judgment in a case not within its jurisdiction. Want of jurisdiction of the subject-matter of the suit will arrest a cause at any stage of the proceedings. If tlie District Court had jurisdiction upon an application like the present, under the statute requiring an affirmance of judgment without reference to the merits, this court would not look into the record for the purpose of revising any error which may have been committed in the exercise of that jurisdiction; hut not having jurisdiction of the case, it cannot be entertained for any purpose, and must therefore be stricken from the docket.
Ordered accordingly.