Court Opinion

ID: 9828270
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-09-01 18:15:10.212319+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:42:46.745783
License: Public Domain

On Rehearing.
In their motion for rehearing appellants assert that this court erred in its statement to the effect that the trial court entered judgment in favor of appellee against “all parties” for foreclosure of his lien in the amount prayed for against the property described in plaintiff’s pleadings.
*1062In entering judgment the trial court adjudged that plaintiff “do have and is awarded foreclosure of plaintiff’s lien in the amount of 766.30 Dollars on the above described property as such lien existed on 6th day of September, 1928.” This was the date of the deed of trust from Broyles to secure the note payable to Reynolds. It was further ordered that the order of sale shall have the force of a writ of possession as between the parties to “this suit” and any person claiming under the said defendant (without indicating which defendant) by any right acquired pending this suit.
We construe this to be a foreclosure as against all who were named as parties defendant, and we construe the later recital that on account of want of service the cause is dismissed as against Thos. Broyles, to be a dismissal of the prayer for personal judgment.
The motion for rehearing is overruled.