Bell v. First State Bank of Paducah

Court of Appeals of Texas

Bell v. First State Bank of Paducah

140 S.W. 111, 1911 Tex. App. LEXIS 283

CourtCourt of Appeals of Texas

DecidedJune 10, 1911

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 140 S.W. 111 (Bell v. First State Bank of Paducah) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Texas primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Bell v. First State Bank of Paducah, 140 S.W. 111, 1911 Tex. App. LEXIS 283 (Tex. Ct. App. 1911).

Pincite

Opinion

DUNKLIN, J.

M. T. Bell and the Bell-West' Lumber Company have prosecuted a writ of error from a judgment rendered against them in favor of the First State Bank of Paducah, Tex. The judgment was against plaintiffs in error, as garnishees; J. F. Hardin being the defendant in the original suit, and against whom judgment was rendered at the same time. In its suit against J. F. Hardin, the plaintiff sued out writs of garnishment against the plaintiffs in error, and also against Campbell & Campbell and J. H. Doolen, but the garnishment proceedings were not docketed against the garnishees separately as contemplated by the statute, and the suit against the defendant and all the garnishees was tried at the same time and as one suit.

[1,2] In the case of Cohn v. Tillman, 66 Tex. 99, 18 S. W. 111, it was held that the failure' to docket the garnishment proceedings against each of the garnishees was an irregularity, but not one that would affect the validity of the judgment, if the proceedings were otherwise legal. The judgment rendered failed to make any disposition of the cause of action against the garnishees Campbell & Campbell and J. H. Doolen, and was therefore not a final judgment, and for that reason the writ of error in this cause must be dismissed. Williams v. Bell, 53 Tex. Civ. App. 474, 116 S. W. 840, and authorities there cited.

Writ of error dismissed.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

DUNKLIN, J.

M. T. Bell and the Bell-West' Lumber Company have prosecuted a writ of error from a judgment rendered against them in favor of the First State Bank of Paducah, Tex. The judgment was against plaintiffs in error, as garnishees; J. F. Hardin being the defendant in the original suit, and against whom judgment was rendered at the same time. In its suit against J. F. Hardin, the plaintiff sued out writs of garnishment against the plaintiffs in error, and also against Campbell & Campbell and J. H. Doolen, but the garnishment proceedings were not docketed against the garnishees separately as contemplated by the statute, and the suit against the defendant and all the garnishees was tried at the same time and as one suit.

[1,2] In the case of Cohn v. Tillman, 66 Tex. 99, 18 S. W. 111, it was held that the failure' to docket the garnishment proceedings against each of the garnishees was an irregularity, but not one that would affect the validity of the judgment, if the proceedings were otherwise legal. The judgment rendered failed to make any disposition of the cause of action against the garnishees Campbell & Campbell and J. H. Doolen, and was therefore not a final judgment, and for that reason the writ of error in this cause must be dismissed. Williams v. Bell, 53 Tex. Civ. App. 474, 116 S. W. 840, and authorities there cited.

Writ of error dismissed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

140 S.W. 111, 1911 Tex. App. LEXIS 283, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/bell-v-first-state-bank-of-paducah-texapp-1911.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack