Hollingsworth v. Bagley
Texas Supreme Court
Error from Rusk. Tried below before the Hon. J. B. Williamson. The opinion states the facts of the case.
1Opinion of the CourtWalker, J.
The appellant brought suit in the district court against Cameron and Scott. Ho cost bond was required from the plaintiff. Pending the suit, both the defendants died, and the suit abated, and was never-revived against the representatives of either of them. But the court permitted the officers of the court to have judgment against the plaintiff for the sum of twenty-two dollars and fifteen cents, on which execution issued on the twenty-eighth day of July, 1869; was levied on the land described in the petition ; and it was sold to H. G. Bagley, the appellee, on the first Tuesday in August, 1869.
A…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Mills v. AlexanderTexas Supreme Court · 1858
- Conkrite v. Hart & Co.Texas Supreme Court · 1853
- Cutts v. HaskinsMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1814
- Martel v. HernsheimTexas Supreme Court · 1852
3Cited by3 opinions
- Levy v. Ferguson Lumber Co.Supreme Court of Arkansas · 1888
- Ex Parte SpauldingCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1985
- Ex Parte SpauldingCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1985