Court Opinion

ID: 9831617
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-09-01 21:15:02.878919+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:43:36.515887
License: Public Domain

JENKINS, J.
James O’Donnell brought suit against Mrs. E. J. Epley and others in the form of trespass to try title, but this was in fact a suit to establish a boundary line. Defendants Ollie Joy, John Joy, Joy Wallace, and Bonnie Wallace were nonresidents, and were cited by publication. The jury returned a verdict in favor of the plaintiff, except as to J. R. Wallace, in whose favor they found on his plea of limitation as to a particular portion of the land in controversy; he having disclaimed as to the remainder of the land. The court rendered judgment in accordance with said verdict and against all of the other defendants for costs.
[1] Plaintiffs in error ask that this judgment be reversed, for the reason that the court had no power to render a personal judgment against the nonresidents for costs. The judgment against the nonresidents for costs is a nullity, and plaintiffs in error insist for this reason that it should be reversed and remanded.
Under rule 62a for the government of courts of Civil Appeals (149 S. W. x), this affords no ground for reversal; but so much of said judgment as decrees costs against the nonresident defendants is here vacated and annulled, and the judgment of the trial court is in all other respects affirmed.
Reformed and affirmed.