Steinlein v. Dial
Texas Supreme Court
Error from Harrison. This suit was instituted before a justice of tho peace. The plaintiff bad judgment, and the defendant removed the case by certiorari to the District Court.
Read the full summary
Error from Harrison. This suit was instituted before a justice of tho peace. The plaintiff bad judgment, and the defendant removed the case by certiorari to the District Court. After one mistrial and continuance there was a trial in the District Court, which resulted in a verdict for the original defendant, (plaintiff in tiie certiorari.) The plaintiff applied for a new trial on the ground, among others, that lie was surprised by the testimony of a witness who, lie stated, bad testified differently upon a former trial of the ease. He averred that, had he not been taken by surprise by the…
1Opinion of the CourtWheeler, J.
The application for a new trial was manifestly insufficient. It ought, to have been accompanied by the affidavits of the witnesses by whom the party proposed to prove the facts alleged as the ground of his application. (Cotton v. The State, 4 Tex. R., 260.) It is evident, moreover, from the statement of facts, that the new trial was asked to obtain merely cumulative evidence.
The ground mainlv relied on for a reversal of the judgment, and the only *135one which requires particular notice, is the overruling of the motion to set aside the verdict and dismiss the case for the want of sufficiency in…
2Cited by4 opinions
- Koontz v. StateTexas Supreme Court · 1874
- Cambpell v. StateTexas Supreme Court · 1861
- Parker Motor Co. v. HamiltonCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1928
- Reid v. ClarksonCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1911