Court Opinion

ID: 9828288
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-09-01 18:16:15.018856+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:42:46.984034
License: Public Domain

On Motion for Rehearing.
There are two judgments copied into the record; in the first judgment was rendered against the San Antonio, • Uvalde & Gulf Railway Company and the receiver. There was no verdict against the receiver. The second judgment, which is the only one that should have been placed in the record, upon suggestion of appellees, was corrected so as to strike out the name of the railway company last named as well as the name of the San Antonio, Fredericksburg & Northern Railway Company and the words “for which they have their execution.’’ As corrected, the judgment was against the St. -Louis, Brownsville & Mexico Railway Company for the sum of $859.66, against A. R. Ponder, receiver, for $859.66, and against the San Antonio & Aransas Pass Railway Company for $122.65, and in favor of the receiver of the San Antonio, Fredericksburg & Northern Railway Company. It was stated in our opinion that the judgment was against the San Antonio, Uvalde & Gulf Railway Company, as appears from one of the judgments, hut that was omitted in the second or corrected judgment and judgment rendered against Ponder, against whom no verdict was returned. This is an immaterial matter to correct, and does not affect the judgment of this court, except the reversal is as to Ponder, receiver, and not as to his railroad, which was not a party to the suit.
Our judgment will be corrected so as to affirm as to the San Antonio & Aransas Pass Railway Company and the receiver of the San Antonio, Fredericksburg & Northern Railway Company, and so as to reverse as to the St. Louis, Brownsville & Mexico Railway Company and A. R. Ponder, receiver of the San Antonio, Uvalde & Gulf Railway Company. With the exceptions of making the corrections indicated, the motion for rehearing is overruled.