Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

35 Tex. 39

McDaniel v. Monday

Texas Supreme Court

Decided July 1, 1872

Texas Supreme Court · decided 1872-07-01

<p>Error from Houston. Tried below before the Hon. L. W. Cooper.</p> <p>The opinion discloses the case.</p>

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1872-07-01

How this case has been cited

Cited by 4 later decisions — most recently December 1963

4 state decisions

201872188018901900191019201930194019501960decided

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

Ogden, J.

¶1judgment by agreement of both plaintiff and defendant was rendered in the court below, against the defendants, and in favor of the plaintiff, for the full amount of his demand.

¶2We are therefore of the opinion that the agreed judgment cured all the errors, if any, of the lower court, down to the time of the agreement and judgment, and are therefore disinclined to notice the errors complained •of by the plaintiffs in error, in the progress of the trial of this case.

¶3The plaintiffs in error, however, complain of the judgment below, for the reason that it assesses all the costs in this behalf expended, against the defendants in the lower court, and claim that the costs of a former appeal, and all costs previous to said appeal, should be decreed against the plaintiff below.

¶4We think that this question was fully settled in the •case of Farquhar v. Hendley & Co., 24 Texas, 300, in which the rule of costs was fully and accurately explained.

¶5The judgment of the district court is therefore affirmed.

¶6Affirmed.

/35/tex/39 · .json · Public domain