Martin v. Wade
Texas Supreme Court
Error from Bell. Tried below before tbe Hon. R. E. B. Baylor. The entry of tbe judgment, in tbis case, was as follows: “ Tbis “day came the plaintiff, by bis attorney, and acknowledges to “have received tbe full amount sued for; it is therefore considered by tbe court, that tbe plaintiff have and recover of and “from said defendants, all costs in this behalf expended, for “which execution may issue.”
1Opinion of the CourtRoberts, J.
Tbis is a suit upon a title bond, for specific performance. There was no service of process on tbe defendants ; nor does it appear, by tbe recital in tbe judgment entry, that they appeared. Tbe plaintiff appeared, and acknowledged satisfaction of bis demand, and tbe court rendered simply a judgment for costs, against tbe defendants.
It certainly would have been erroneous, in tbis case, to have rendered a judgment against tbe defendants for costs, they having neither appeared nor been served with process. But there being no decree, disposing of tbe cause, there is no final judgment which tbis…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Warren v. ShumanTexas Supreme Court · 1849
3Cited by5 opinions
- Eastham v. SallisTexas Supreme Court · 1884
- International & G. N. Railroad v. Smith CountyTexas Supreme Court · 1882
- Nelon v. ThomasCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1959
- Giersa v. YocumCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1883
- Owens v. LevyCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1883