Harbison v. McMurray, 7680.
| Court | Supreme Court of Texas |
| Writing for the Court | Critz |
| Citation | 158 S.W.2d 284 |
| Parties | HARBISON v. McMURRAY, Sheriff, et al. |
| Docket Number | No. 7680.,7680. |
| Decision Date | 21 January 1942 |
v.
McMURRAY, Sheriff, et al.
Page 285
Error to Court of Civil Appeals of Eighth Supreme Judicial District.
Habeas corpus proceeding by B. G. Harbison against W. L. McMurray, Sheriff, and another. An order remanding relator to the custody of the sheriff was affirmed by the Court of Civil Appeals, 132 S.W.2d 916, and relator brings error.
Reversed and remanded.
McEntire & Shank, Eckford & McMahon, and James H. Walter, all of Dallas, for appellant.
Wilbur T. Knape, of Dallas, and Stone Wells, of Henderson, for appellees.
CRITZ, Justice.
On November 19, 1941, we delivered an opinion and rendered a judgment affirming the judgment of the Court of Civil Appeals in this cause. The cause is now before us on motion for rehearing, filed by B. G. Harbison, plaintiff in error. We have reached the conclusion that we were in error in our former judgment and in some of the holdings in our former opinion. We therefore withdraw such opinion and order that it be not published. We substitute therefor the following opinion:
This is a habeas corpus proceeding, begun ex parte in the District Court of Rusk County, Texas, by B. G. Harbison to secure his release from alleged illegal confinement and restraint.
It appears that a commission was issued out of the District Court of Rusk County, Texas, to take the depositions of Harbison in certain civil suits there pending. Such commission was placed in the hands of G. S. Jones, a notary public of such county, with the request that he take Harbison's depositions. Harbison was summoned, and duly appeared before Jones as a notary public, but refused to answer the questions propounded to him. Jones, as notary public, then and there orally adjudged Harbison in contempt, ordered him to jail, and fined him $100. Jones, as
Page 286
notary public, also issued a written commitment, which was placed in the hands of W. L. McMurray, Sheriff of Rusk County, Texas. Acting on such commitment, McMurray arrested Harbison, and placed him in the Rusk County jail. After the happening of the above events, Harbison sued out a writ of habeas corpus in the district court. The application stated that relator was illegally restrained of his liberty by Jones as notary and McMurray as sheriff. On final trial in the district court, Harbison was denied any relief from restraint, and was remanded to the custody of the sheriff. Harbison appealed to the Court of Civil Appeals, but on final hearing in that court the appeal was dismissed, on the ground that the court had no jurisdiction. 132 S.W.2d 916. The case is in this court on writ of error granted on application for Harbison.
Before proceeding further we deem it expedient to quote the pertinent provisions of Sections 5 and 6 of Article V of our Constitution, Vernon's Ann.St. and Articles 1819, 2249, 2265, 2270, and 3748 of our Revised Civil Statutes, Vernon's Ann. Civ.St. arts. 2249, 2265, 2270, 3748.
Section 5 of Article V of our State Constitution, so far as pertinent here, reads as follows: "Sec. 5. The Court of Criminal Appeals shall have appellate jurisdiction co-extensive with the limits of the State in all criminal cases of whatever grade, with such exceptions and under such regulations as may be prescribed by law. * * *"
Section 6 of Article V of our State Constitution, so far as pertinent here, reads as follows: "Sec. 6. * * * Said Court of Civil Appeals shall have appellate jurisdiction * * * which shall extend to all civil cases of which the District Courts or County Courts have original or appellate jurisdiction, under such restrictions and regulations as may be prescribed by law. * * *"
The above-mentioned articles of our Civil Statutes read as follows:
"Art. 1819. The appellate jurisdiction of the Courts of Civil Appeals shall extend to all civil cases within the limits of their respective districts of which the District Courts and County Courts have or assume jurisdiction when the amount in controversy or the judgment rendered shall exceed One Hundred Dollars exclusive of interest and costs."
"Art. 2249. An appeal or Writ of Error may be taken to the Court of Civil Appeals from every final judgment of the district court in civil cases, and from every final judgment in the county court in civil cases of which the county court has original jurisdiction, and from every final judgment of the county court in civil cases in which the court has appellate jurisdiction,...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Hatten v. City of Houston, No. 14255
...did not err in refusing to grant appellants a trial by jury.' Habeas corpus suits are civil cases. Harbison v. McMurray, 138 Tex. 192, 158 S.W.2d 284. In the case of Hickman v. Smith, Tex.Civ.App., 238 S.W.2d 838, 839, writ ref., the court said that the right of trial by jury as guaranteed ......
-
In re D.W., No. 2-06-191-CV.
...Family Code, Title 1, 5 TEX. TECH. L.REV. 281, 407 (1974). 49. TEX. CONST. art. V, § 6(a). 50. See Harbison v. McMurray, 138 Tex. 192, 158 S.W.2d 284, 287 (1942) (appellate jurisdiction subject to control by legislature but only "within constitutional limitations"); Langever, 124 Tex. 80, 7......
-
Ex parte Rhodes, No. 357-97
...arose from a civil proceeding, it is still considered a "civil," rather than a "criminal," case. Harbison v. McMurray, 138 Tex. 192, 158 S.W.2d 284, 288 (1942). Therefore, we are bound by Texas Supreme Court precedent on this matter, and will apply these elements to analyze appellee's Doubl......
-
Ex Parte Rieck, No. 74799.
...815 (1934), affirmed, People ex rel. Hauptmann v. Hanley, 242 A.D. 257, 274 N.Y.S. 824 (1934)). 42. Harbison v. McMurray, 138 Tex. 192, 158 S.W.2d 284, 287 43. Atty Gen. op. DM-295 at *22 (citing In re Moy Chee Kee, 33 F. 377, 379 (C.C.N.D.Cal.1887); McFarland v. Johnson, 27 Tex. 105, 109 (......
-
Hatten v. City of Houston, 14255
...did not err in refusing to grant appellants a trial by jury.' Habeas corpus suits are civil cases. Harbison v. McMurray, 138 Tex. 192, 158 S.W.2d 284. In the case of Hickman v. Smith, Tex.Civ.App., 238 S.W.2d 838, 839, writ ref., the court said that the right of trial by jury as guaranteed ......
-
In re D.W., 2-06-191-CV.
...Family Code, Title 1, 5 TEX. TECH. L.REV. 281, 407 (1974). 49. TEX. CONST. art. V, § 6(a). 50. See Harbison v. McMurray, 138 Tex. 192, 158 S.W.2d 284, 287 (1942) (appellate jurisdiction subject to control by legislature but only "within constitutional limitations"); Langever, 124 Tex. 80, 7......
-
Ex parte Rhodes, 357-97
...arose from a civil proceeding, it is still considered a "civil," rather than a "criminal," case. Harbison v. McMurray, 138 Tex. 192, 158 S.W.2d 284, 288 (1942). Therefore, we are bound by Texas Supreme Court precedent on this matter, and will apply these elements to analyze appellee's Doubl......
-
S.G., Jr., Matter of, 04-94-00519-CV
...if the underlying case is civil in nature because it is considered a final judgment in a civil case. Harbison v. McMurray, 138 Tex. 192, 158 S.W.2d 284, 287-88 (1942); 3 cf. In the Matter of M.C., 915 S.W.2d 118 (Tex.App.--San Antonio 1996, no writ) (jurisdiction established because juvenil......