Sapp v. King
Texas Supreme Court
Appeal from Nacogdoches. Tried below before the Hon. James I. Perkins. This was a motion to retax costs, made by plaintiffs in the case of King & Davidson v. B. D. Sapp, in the district court of Nacogdoches county. The motion was sustained. The necessary facts appear in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the Court
Willie, Chief Justice.
A witness in a civil suit can be subpoenaed only when he is represented to be a resident of the county in *571which the trial of the suit is to take place; or when he is found therein at the time of the trial. R. S., Art. 2209. It is only when a witness appears in obedience to an authorized subpoena that he is entitled to per diem and mileage. He must be summoned in this way, and thereupon the party summoning him becomes primarily liable for his fees, though they are finally taxed in the bill of costs against the party cast in the suit. Ib., Arts. 2213, 2416.
As the law makes…
2Cited by6 opinions
- Alexander v. HarrisonIndiana Court of Appeals · 1891
- Zelavin v. Tonopah Belmont Development Co.Nevada Supreme Court · 1915
- Booth v. ChadwickCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1941
- Fidelity & Deposit Co. of Maryland v. ScottCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1919
- International & Great Northern Railroad v. RichmondCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1902
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.