From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

H. E. White v. C. B. Erwin

Supreme Court of Texas
Jan 4, 1939
122 S.W.2d 1043 (Tex. 1939)

Opinion

No. 7191.

Decided January 4, 1939.

Jurisdiction — Conflict — Appeal and Error.

Where the evidence shows that the case was one over which the county court might have had jurisdiction, although it was brought in the district court, the Supreme Court is without jurisdiction, in the absence of conflict with decision of another court.

Error to the Court of Civil Appeals for the Eleventh District, in an appeal from Armstrong County.

Suit by C. B. Erwin against H. E. White to recover the cost of a quantity of wheat sold to defendant and also for interest at the rate of six per cent from November 12, 1931. Judgment in favor of defendant was reversed and remanded by the Court of Civil Appeals ( 97 S.W.2d 707), and both parties have brought error to the Supreme Court.

The case was referred to the Commission of Appeals, Section A, for their opinion thereon and the Supreme Court adopted same and ordered judgment entered in accordance therewith.

Both application dismissed for want of jurisdiction.

J. S. Stalling and S.E. Fish, both of Claude, for plaintiff in error, H. E. White.

Cooper Lumpkin, of Amarillo, for defendant in error, C. B. Erwin.


The Court of Civil Appeals reversed and remanded this cause because of a remark inadvertently made in the presence of the jury by the presiding judge. 97 S.W.2d 707. Writ of error was granted in favor of plaintiff in error White because the Court was inclined to the opinion that the remark did not constitute reversible error. Writ of error in favor of defendant in error Erwin was granted solely because of granting the writ in favor of White.

On examination of the pleadings we find that Erwin as plaintiff in the district court sued for only $549.62, with six per cent interest; and White in cross action sued for only $290.17, with six per cent interest. It is thus seen that the suit is one over which the county court might have had jurisdiction, although brought in the district court. In such case the Supreme Court is without jurisdiction. Grand Lodge Colored K. P. of Texas v. Johns, 127 Tex. 241, 91 S.W.2d 1049. There was no such conflict shown as would give jurisdiction. See same case and authorities there cited.

Both applications are now dismissed for want of jurisdiction.

Opinion adopted by the Supreme Court, January 4, 1939.


Summaries of

H. E. White v. C. B. Erwin

Supreme Court of Texas
Jan 4, 1939
122 S.W.2d 1043 (Tex. 1939)
Case details for

H. E. White v. C. B. Erwin

Case Details

Full title:H. E. WHITE v. C. B. ERWIN

Court:Supreme Court of Texas

Date published: Jan 4, 1939

Citations

122 S.W.2d 1043 (Tex. 1939)
122 S.W.2d 1043