Weems v. Watson

• Citation: 39 S.W. 135
• Parties: WEEMS et al. v. WATSON et al.<SMALL><SUP>1</SUP></SMALL>
• Decision Date: 09 January 1897
• Court: Court of Appeals of Texas

39 S.W. 135

WEEMS et al. v. WATSON et al.¹

Court of Civil Appeals of Texas.

January 9, 1897.

Error from district court, Haskell county; A. H. Kirby, Special Judge.

Action by S. C. Watson and others against Roberts and others. Plaintiffs had judgment against Roberts, and he had judgment against the other defendants, and the latter bring error. Dismissed.

Ewing & Ring, for plaintiffs in error. Ed. J. Hamner, H. G. McConnell, and Foster & Scott, for defendants in error.

HUNTER, J.

The plaintiffs below, including Gertrude Watson, recovered judgment for the lands in controversy against Roberts, and Roberts in the same judgment recovered against plaintiffs in error for over $5,000 on their covenants of warranty of title to the land. The petition for writ of error named all the plaintiffs as defendants therein except Gertrude Watson, who was neither named in the petition for writ of error nor in the citation issued thereon, but she was made one of the payees in the writ of error bond. Defendants in error move to dismiss the writ of error because this court has no jurisdiction of the case, and this motion we sustain. Our statute (Rev. St. 1895, art. 1391) provides that the petition for writ of error shall state the names and residences of the parties to the judgment adversely interested to the plaintiffs in the petition, and this means every one of the parties adversely interested; and, unless this is done, this court acquires no jurisdiction of the case. Cates v. Sparkman, 66 Tex. 156, 18 S. W. 446; Summerlin v. Reeves, 29 Tex. 88; Thompson v. House, 23 Tex. 179; Thompson v. Pine, 55 Tex. 429; Barnard v. Tarlton, 57 Tex. 403; Young v. Russell, 60 Tex. 687.

Plaintiffs in error move this court for leave to amend the petition for writ of error, so as to add the name of Gertrude Watson as a defendant therein, and it is shown that more than one year has elapsed since the date of the judgment, and that by reason thereof no writ of error or appeal can now be prosecuted from said judgment. This motion we must deny, as we know of no authority, statutory or otherwise, authorizing such amendments to be made in this court. Article 1390 of our Revised Statutes of 1895 provides that the petition for writ of error shall be filed with the clerk of the court in which the judgment was rendered, that it shall be signed by the party applying for the writ, or by his attorney, and shall be addressed to such clerk. Article 1393 requires the clerk to whom the petition is...