Carswell v. Crowther

Court of Appeals of Texas

Carswell v. Crowther

16 S.W. 172, 4 Willson 216

CourtCourt of Appeals of Texas

DecidedJune 25, 1890

DocketNo. 6598

StatusPublished

This text of 16 S.W. 172 (Carswell v. Crowther) 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

Carswell v. Crowther, 16 S.W. 172, 4 Willson 216 (Tex. Ct. App. 1890).

Pincite

Opinion

Opinion by

White, P. J.

[217]*217June 25, 1890.

§ 153. Appeal; will not be entertained unless the record shoius a final judgment in the trial court. Appellant brought this suit by sequestration to recover certain personal property or baggage alleged to have been unlawfully and maliciously seized and withheld from him by appellee, and praying for actual and exemplary damages. Among other defenses appellee pleaded specially that she was an hotel-keeper; that appellant and family became guests of her hotel; and that he owed her as a balance due for board, $91.40, for which she had a boardinghouse or hotel-keeper’s lien upon his personal property or baggage; and she prayed a foreclosure of her said lien. Appellant himself insists that no final judgment was rendered at the trial in the court below, and the record supports this position. Under such state of case we do not feel called upon to discuss the several errors complained of. There being no final judgment, this court will hot entertain an appeal in the case. [Fitzgerald v. Evans, 53 Tex. 461; 1 Civil Cas. Ct. App., § 310; Mayfield v. State, 40 Tex. 290.]

Appeal dismissed.

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

Opinion by

White, P. J.

[217]*217June 25, 1890.

§ 153. Appeal; will not be entertained unless the record shoius a final judgment in the trial court. Appellant brought this suit by sequestration to recover certain personal property or baggage alleged to have been unlawfully and maliciously seized and withheld from him by appellee, and praying for actual and exemplary damages. Among other defenses appellee pleaded specially that she was an hotel-keeper; that appellant and family became guests of her hotel; and that he owed her as a balance due for board, $91.40, for which she had a boardinghouse or hotel-keeper’s lien upon his personal property or baggage; and she prayed a foreclosure of her said lien. Appellant himself insists that no final judgment was rendered at the trial in the court below, and the record supports this position. Under such state of case we do not feel called upon to discuss the several errors complained of. There being no final judgment, this court will hot entertain an appeal in the case. [Fitzgerald v. Evans, 53 Tex. 461; 1 Civil Cas. Ct. App., § 310; Mayfield v. State, 40 Tex. 290.]

Appeal dismissed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

16 S.W. 172, 4 Willson 216, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/carswell-v-crowther-texapp-1890.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack