Marx v. Lange, Levy & Co.

Citations

• 61 Tex. 547
• 1884 Tex. LEXIS 143

Syllabus

<p>1. Witness — Examination of. — The action of the court below in permitting a witness, recalled to the witness stand (after his examination by both parties), for the purpose of laying a predicate for his impeachment, to be again examined, will afford no cause for reversal, unless it is shown that the discretion of the court which permitted this to be done operated to the prejudice of the complaining party.</p> <p>2. Charge of court — Separate property.— It was error to instruct a jury, in a case in which it was sought to subject separate property of the wife to the payment of the husband’s debt, the separate property being invested in a mercantile business, that it was protected “so long as it was invested in. that business.”</p> <p>3. Same.— It was also error to instruct a jury, in a case where the separate-means of the wife, invested in merchandise, was levied on to satisfy the-husband’s debt, to the effect that the creditor of the husband could indemnify himself by subjecting as much of her separate property, or its increase, invested in the mercantile enterprise, as she had withdrawn from it,, and reinvested in other property; it being shown that some of it had beers reinvested in a homestead.</p> <p>4 Judgment — Costs.— See statement and opinion for a case in which it was error to render judgment against the husband in a proceeding where property of the wife had been levied on to satisfy the husband’s debt, the property being claimed by the wife.</p>