Case Name: GOSWICK v. TEMPLETON & HIGHTOWER
Court: Texas Courts of Civil Appeals
Jurisdiction: Texas
Decision Date: 1910-12-15
Citations: 132 S.W. 945
Docket Number: 
Parties: GOSWICK v. TEMPLETON & HIGHTOWER.
Judges: 
Reporter: South Western Reporter
Volume: 132
Pages: 945–946

Head Matter:
GOSWICK v. TEMPLETON & HIGHTOWER.
(Court of Civil Appeals of Texas.
Dec. 15, 1910.)
Appeal and Error (§ 20 ) — Jurisdiction-Amount Involved.
Plaintiff sued on an open account for $105.-36, and defendant claimed by cross-action a debt for $166.82. Tbe case, as disclosed by the record, was first tried in the county court. Held that, the amount in controversy being below the original jurisdiction of the county court, it was without jurisdiction, and henee the Court of Civil Appeals could acquire no jurisdiction by appeal.
[Ed. Note. — For other cases, see Appeal and Error, Cent. Dig. §§ 81-87; Dec. Dig. § 20. ]
Appeal from Franklin County Court; G. E. Cowan, Judge.
Action by Templeton & Hightower against S. D. Goswick. Judgment for plaintiffs, and defendant appeals. Dismissed.
Hope" & Shurtleff and L. W. Davidson, for appellant.
For other cases see same topic and section NUMBER in Dec. Dig. & Am. Dig. Key No. Series & Rep’r Indexes

Opinion:
LEVY, J.
The record in the case shows that the plaintiffs in the court below sued for a debt due by open account for $105.36, and the defendant claimed by cross-action a debt for $166.82 due by open account. It seems from the record that this case was tried in the county court in the first instance, as evidenced by all the file marks on the papers, and there is nothing to' show us that the case was not brought and tried in the county court in the first' instance. The amount of the debt sued for is below the original jurisdiction of the county court, and it had no original jurisdiction to try the suit, and therefore this court acauires no jurisdiction on appeal.
The appeal is therefore dismissed.