Case Name: Word & East v. Fort Worth & Denver City Railway Company
Court: Supreme Court of Texas
Jurisdiction: Texas
Decision Date: 1895-11-21
Citations: 88 Tex. 661
Docket Number: No. 809
Parties: Word & East v. Fort Worth & Denver City Railway Company.
Judges: 
Reporter: Texas Reports
Volume: 88
Pages: 661–661

Head Matter:
Word & East v. Fort Worth & Denver City Railway Company.
No. 809.
Delivered November 21, 1895.
1. Dissent in Court of Civil Appeals Upon the Facts.
While the Supreme Court has jurisdiction in case of dissent in the Court of Civil Appeals, yet if thé application and accompanying papers show that the dissent was upon a question of fact, the writ will be refused, as this court would have no power to revise the action of the Court of Civil Appeals ............................................................... 661
2. Same.
The majority of the Court of Civil Appeals held, in effect, that if the verdict was not without evidence to support it, it was against such a preponderance of the evidence that the judgment should be reversed. The decision of that court was final—being upon a question of fact................... 661
Application for writ of error to Court of Civil Appeals for Second Disti-ict, in an appeal from Wichita County.
R. Cobb and Ward & James, for application.

Opinion:
GAINES, Chief Justice.
—This is an application for a writ of error to reverse a judgment of the Court of Civil Appeals, which reversed the judgment of the District Court. One of the justices of the appellate court dissented from the conclusions of that court, and we therefore have jurisdiction of the cause.
The majority of the Court of Civil Appeals held, in effect, that if the verdict was not without evidence to support it, it was against such a preponderance of the evidence that the judgment should be reversed. It was upon this point that the dissent arose. The conclusion of the Court of Civil Appeals determines, for the purposes of the appeal, a question of fact, and their jurisdiction over the question is made final by the Constitution and statutes. While, therefore, we have jurisdiction over the case, we have no power to revise their ruling upon the point of dissent, and therefore give no opinion upon it.
The application is therefore refused.
Refused.