Court Opinion

ID: 9832058
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-09-01 21:35:03.257114+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:43:41.589954
License: Public Domain

On Rehearing.
[8] Both appellee and appellants have filed motions for rehearing. Appellee calls our attention to one expression in our original opinion which was so worded by inadvertence, to wit:
“The judgment must also he reformed as to the 10 per cent, attorney’s fees, as affecting the wife and the homestead upon $263, and interest thereon.”
It is true that the trial court did not adjudge any lien on, or grant a foreclosure against, the homestead for attorney’s fees. In this we think he was correct. Harn v. Am. Mut. B. & L. Association, 95 Tex. 79, 65 S. W. 176; Am. B. & S. Association v. Daugherty, 27 Tex. Civ. App. 430, 66 S. W. 131, writ of error refused, 95 Tex. 673; Summerville v. King, 98 Tex. 332, 84 S. W. 643, 83 S. W. 680. The above-quoted expression in the original opinion was intended to read and should have read:
“The judgment must also be reformed as to the 10 per cent, attorney’s fees, as affecting the personal judgment against the wife, upon $263, and interest thereon.”
And the correction is here made, and the judgment will be so entered. We have carefully examined both motions, but have concluded that the same should be overruled, except in respect to the correction already noted, and it is so ordered.
Motion overruled.
CONNER, C. J., not sitting, serving on writ of error committee at Austin.