Texas Brewing Co. v. State

Court of Appeals of Texas

Texas Brewing Co. v. State

195 S.W. 211, 1917 Tex. App. LEXIS 497

CourtCourt of Appeals of Texas

DecidedMarch 22, 1917

DocketNo. 1776.

StatusPublished

This text of 195 S.W. 211 (Texas Brewing Co. v. State) 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

Texas Brewing Co. v. State, 195 S.W. 211, 1917 Tex. App. LEXIS 497 (Tex. Ct. App. 1917).

Pincite

Opinion

WILLSON, C. J.

(after stating the facts- as above). We are of the opinion that papers which do not form a part of the record proper of a case, and which the clerk is not directed by a statute to file, are not within the meaning of article 3855, Vernon’s Statutes, providing a fee to the clerk of 15 cents for “filing each paper” in a civil case. The letters in question, when admitted as evidence, did not become a part of the record proper of the cases (Noyes v. Parker, 64 Vt. 379, 24 Atl. 12; State v. Shappy, 79 Vt. 306, 65 Atl. 78; Bell v. Eddy, 2 Ind. T. 312, 51 S. W. 959; Smith v. Moseley, 234 Mo. 286, 137 S. W. 971), and we have been referred to and have found no statute requiring the clerk to file them. The letters might, when they had served the purpose for which they were admitted, have been withdrawn from the custody of the clerk by the owners thereof. If they thereafterwards remained in his custody, it was because he and the owners were willing that they should, and he then held them for the owners, and not in the discharge of a duty which the law imposed upon him. Therefore we think the court erred when’ he refused to strike’from the. bill of costs the item of $750 taxed therein for filing the letters.

In view of the fact that the judgments were based upon agreements of the parties therefor, and therefore that entering same did not involve the assessment of damages, we are further of the opinion that the clerk was not entitled to tax as costs due him the fee of 50 cents for “assessing damages.”

The judgment will be reversed, and the cause will be remanded, with instructions to the court below to retax the costs in accordance with the. ruling we have made.

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

WILLSON, C. J.

(after stating the facts- as above). We are of the opinion that papers which do not form a part of the record proper of a case, and which the clerk is not directed by a statute to file, are not within the meaning of article 3855, Vernon’s Statutes, providing a fee to the clerk of 15 cents for “filing each paper” in a civil case. The letters in question, when admitted as evidence, did not become a part of the record proper of the cases (Noyes v. Parker, 64 Vt. 379, 24 Atl. 12; State v. Shappy, 79 Vt. 306, 65 Atl. 78; Bell v. Eddy, 2 Ind. T. 312, 51 S. W. 959; Smith v. Moseley, 234 Mo. 286, 137 S. W. 971), and we have been referred to and have found no statute requiring the clerk to file them. The letters might, when they had served the purpose for which they were admitted, have been withdrawn from the custody of the clerk by the owners thereof. If they thereafterwards remained in his custody, it was because he and the owners were willing that they should, and he then held them for the owners, and not in the discharge of a duty which the law imposed upon him. Therefore we think the court erred when’ he refused to strike’from the. bill of costs the item of $750 taxed therein for filing the letters.

In view of the fact that the judgments were based upon agreements of the parties therefor, and therefore that entering same did not involve the assessment of damages, we are further of the opinion that the clerk was not entitled to tax as costs due him the fee of 50 cents for “assessing damages.”

The judgment will be reversed, and the cause will be remanded, with instructions to the court below to retax the costs in accordance with the. ruling we have made.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

195 S.W. 211, 1917 Tex. App. LEXIS 497, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/texas-brewing-co-v-state-texapp-1917.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack