Court Opinion

ID: 9834521
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-09-01 23:39:41.918359+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:44:17.055943
License: Public Domain

On Motion for Rehearing.
Our original opinion states that the judgment directed that the one-seventh undivided interest which T. A. Houston acquired by purchase from Mrs. Vida Ratliff be first sold in satisfaction of the judgment. This statement is incorrect. The judgment directed that the officer “first levy upon * * * and sell the undivided interest of said defendant, T. A. Houston, in and to the estate of said Mrs. S. E.. Norment, deceased, * * * before any other portion of said estate be sold.” This direction precludes the contention of appellant that the interest in the land which Mrs. Ratliff inherited from her father was ordered first sold. This interest was no part of the estate of Mrs. S. E. Norment, deceased. With this correction, the motion for a rehearing will be overruled.
Overruled.