Geiselman v. Brown
Geiselman v. Brown
Opinion of the Court
Article 1591, Paschal’s Digest, requires the appellant or plaintiff in error to file with the clerk of the court below an assignment of errors, distinctly specifying the grounds on which he relies, before he takes the transcript of the record from the clerk’s office, and a copy of such assignment of errors shall be attached to and form a part of the record; and all errors not so distinctly specified shall be considered by the Supreme Court as waived.
As no assignment of errors was made as above required, we might dispose of the cause in a few words; but we have examined the record, and find that the plaintiffs brought suit in the district court of Harris county against the defendant, a citizen of Galveston county, for the purpose of rescinding a contract made in the month of December, 1862, for the sale of certain slaves by defendant to plaintiff. From the petition, it seems to be somewhat doubtful as to the objects sought thereby. The allegations are that said slaves were warranted to be slaves for life, and that after-wards they were declared free by the military authority of the Hnited States; that a note for $5,000, payable in four years, secured by a mortgage on said negroes and certain town lots in Houston, [was executed by the plaintiff.]
Defendant demurred and the demurrer was sustained. We are not apprized of the grounds of the demurrer, but suppose that one reason was, because the plaintiff alleges the residence of the defendant to be in a county different
Affirmed.
Reference
- Full Case Name
- Samuel and Jacob Geiselman v. John Brown
- Cited By
- 1 case
- Status
- Published
- Syllabus
- The 9th section of the act of 11th February, 1860, concerning the proceedings in the district court, reads as follows: “The appellant or plaintiff in error shall in all cases file with the clerk of the court below an assignment of errors, distinctly specifying the grounds on which he relies, before he takes the transcript of the record from the clerk’s office, and a copy of such assignment of errors shall be attached to and form a part of the record; and all errors not so distinctly specified shall be considered by the Supreme Court as waived.” (Paschal’s Dig., Art. 1591, Note 618.) In the absence of an assignment of errors, the court examined the record, and, finding neither jurisdiction nor merits, dismissed the appeal.