Lockhart v. Lytle
Texas Supreme Court
Appeal from Medina. Tried below before the Hon. T. M. Paschal. This was a proceeding asking an injunction to retax costs, begun in 1872 by Lockhart against Samuel Lytle and one Stuckler, the clerk of the court. The object of the suit was to have the costs in the case of Sam Lytle against W. A. Lockhart and William Lytle retaxed, and to restrain their collection during the pendency of the suit. Sam Lytle and William Lytle were made parties defendant by an amended petition.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Medina. Tried below before the Hon. T. M. Paschal. This was a proceeding asking an injunction to retax costs, begun in 1872 by Lockhart against Samuel Lytle and one Stuckler, the clerk of the court. The object of the suit was to have the costs in the case of Sam Lytle against W. A. Lockhart and William Lytle retaxed, and to restrain their collection during the pendency of the suit. Sam Lytle and William Lytle were made parties defendant by an amended petition. Both appeared and answered. The injunction was dissolved, on motion, and an appeal taken by Lockhart from the judgment…
1Opinion of the Court
Bonner, Associate Justice.
This proceeding was commenced by injunction to stay an execution for costs and retax the same, by appellant W. A. Lockhart, defendant in execution, against Samuel Lytle, plaintiff in execution, and William Stuckler, clerk of the District Court of Medina county.
On writ of error prosecuted at a former term of this court, it was held, that the proceeding was not a bill in equity, but a motion to retax cost, with an order or mandate of the court from "which the execution issued to supersede the same until the motion could be heard. It was, in effect, further held, that…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Foster v. WoodNew York Court of Chancery · 1822
- Lockart v. StucklerTexas Supreme Court · 1878
3Cited by1 opinion
- Farnan v. CartwrightCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1935