Cases argued and decided in the Supreme Court of Texas, during the latter part of the Tyler term, 1874, and the first part of the Galveston term, 1875. Volume 42. Page: 109
The following text was automatically extracted from the image on this page using optical character recognition software:
1875.] RENN v. SAMOS. 109
Opinion of the court.
or rather as impertinent matter improperly copied into
It is also insisted in the motion to dismiss that there is
no final judgment against the receiver. This evidently
arises from a misconception of the legal effect and import
of the judgment. As to the receiver, the judgment is a
finality. He was an officer of the court, subject to its
jurisdiction. It was unquestionably his duty to account
to and with the court, under and by virtue of whose authority
he acted. An examination of his accounts, and the
determination of the amount to be paid by him into'court,
or to the parties adjudged by it entitled thereto, was plainly
within its jurisdiction; and, as between the plaintiffs and
the receiver, would be held in any proceeding against
him with like purpose in any other case, res adjudicata.
The court might, no doubt, have enforced payment of the
amount found against the receiver by execution, or imprisonment
for contempt, if he failed or refused to pay
the amount for which he was chargeable, in obedience to
its order. The fact that a less stringent and efficacious
remedy for its collection was given the plaintiffs than
either of these, does not deprive the judgment of its character
of finality. It is not by reason of the order that
execution may issue that the judgment becomes final, but
execution is ordered because the judgment is final.
The other grounds presented in the motion to dismiss
are not such as require any special comment. The motion
to dismiss is accordingly overruled.
Thirty-three errors are assigned by appellant for a
reversal of the judgment. But we are constrained to
hold that there is no statement of facts in the record;
and, under the settled practice of the court, there are only
two or three of them which we are not precluded from
considering, for want of such statement; and neither of
the others are entitled to serious consideration.
A hundred and thirty or forty pages of the transcript
Here’s what’s next.
This book can be searched. Note: Results may vary based on the legibility of text within the document.
Citing and Sharing
Basic information for referencing this web page. We also provide extended guidance on usage rights, references, copying or embedding.
Reference the current page of this Book.
Texas. Supreme Court. Cases argued and decided in the Supreme Court of Texas, during the latter part of the Tyler term, 1874, and the first part of the Galveston term, 1875. Volume 42., book, 1881; St. Louis, Mo.. (texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth28531/m1/117/: accessed April 28, 2017), University of North Texas Libraries, The Portal to Texas History, texashistory.unt.edu; .