Seymour v. Hill

Citations

• 67 Tex. 385
• 3 S.W. 313
• 1887 Tex. LEXIS 888

Syllabus

<p>1. Jurisdiction—Judgment—Injunction.—While a judgment rendered before a justice of the peace can not be revised in the district court, yet it would seem, under former decisions of the Supreme court, that in a suit brought in the district court by the former defendant in a justice’s court to prevent by injunction the collection of the judgment there rendered against him, on the ground of fraud, and because the j udgment was dormant, the district court would have power to inquire whether the sum for which the judgment was rendered was still due, and if so to render a judgment against the plaintiff in the injunction suit for the amount.</p> <p>2. Same—Practice.—In such a proceeding, when it is shown that the judgment has not been paid, the injunction should be dissolved. The only ground for not issuing execution on a dormant judgment being the legal presumption of its payment, when this presumption ceases, to perpetuate the injunction would be in effect to violate a rule which denies the writ, unless irreparable injury would result from its being refused.</p> <p>3. Cases Distinguished from Watson v. Newsham, 17 Texas, 437; North v. Swing, 24 Texas, 193.</p>