Court Opinion

ID: 9829448
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-09-01 19:18:44.934026+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:43:01.220868
License: Public Domain

On Rehearing.
There is one feature of the motion for ■ rehearing which will he briefly discussed, namely: The insistence that proper indexing of the attachment lien in cause No. 7493, was essential to 'the validity of the lien against Butler so as to affect him with constructive notice thereof, and that there was no evidence to show that the lien had been indexed.
The appellants overlook the fact that there was a judgment rendered in cause No. 7493, by which it was ascertained and decreed that the attachment lien was superior to the right of Butler 'under the deed from Garrett and Seastrunk. This judgment was admitted in evidence without objection. Garrett and Seastrunk were parties to that judgment, and Mrs. Goode is in privity with them. That judgment forecloses all inquiry into the regularity of the proceedings necessary to fixing the lien as superior to the rights of Butler, and is res judicata that there had been a compliance with all prerequisites essential to its validity against Butler, and that he was charged with constructive notice thereof. This is the feature of this case which distinguishes it from Bank v. Craig (Tex. Sup.) 257 S. W. 210, and Bank v. Collis (Tex. Civ. App.) 197 S. W. 782, so strongly relied upon by appellants.
The motion is overruled.