Linn v. Arambould

Citations

• 55 Tex. 611
• 1881 Tex. LEXIS 159

Syllabus

<p>1. Final judgment — Appeal — Jurisdiction.— In a suit to cancel deeds on account of fraud in their procurement, the judgment was for the plaintiff, directing a writ of restitution and execution for costs, but reciting that inasmuch as a new trial had been granted in regard to the issue raised by the pleadings as to the amount of the purchase money paid by defendants, the judgment or decree cancelling the deeds should be held in abeyance until that issue should be determined. Held,</p> <p>(1) There could be no final judgment from which an appeal or writ of error could be prosecuted, until all the issues as to all the parties had been finally adjudicated in the district court.</p> <p>(2) No order or decree which does not preclude further proceedings in the case in the court below can be regarded as final.</p> <p>(8) The defendants having prayed for a condemnation and sale of the land to satisfy their claim for purchase money, and that issue remaining undisposed of, the judgment was interlocutory, from which no appeal could be taken.</p> <p>(4) The cause should proceed in the district court as though no trial had occurred.</p> <p>(5) The district court should allow the case to be reinstated on its docket after notice.</p>