Thе judgment of the trial court in this cause was affirmed by the Court of Civil Appeals for the Third Supreme Judicial District on Mаy 24, 1911.
We conclude, aftеr a careful examination of the motion in connection with the record, that while not so designated, it is in substаnce a motion for rehearing within the meaning of that term as used in articles 1633 and 1641, Revised Statutes 1911. The Court of Civil Appeals so held in granting the motion.
The motion was not filed within the time allowed for the filing of motions for reheаring, and was not acted upon at the term of the court at which the original judgment was rendered. This being true, the сourt was without authority to take any action on the motion, and the judgment entered granting the motion and setting aside and vacating the original judgment rendered by said court in said cause and reversing and remanding the case to the trial court must, we think, be held to be void and of no effect. Articles 1633 and 1641, R. S. 1911. McGhee v. Romatka,
The motion in the case before us was filed and acted upon by the Court of Civil Appeals аfter the Supreme Court had refused a writ of eiTor in said cause, and by such action affirmed the original judgment of the Court of Civil Appeals and that of the trial court. The judgment of the Court of Civil Appeals entered in granting the motion, not only set aside and vacated its judgment rendered at a former term, but also in effect set aside and vacated the judgment of the Supreme Court in denying the writ of error in said cause. It is well settled that, when the Jurisdiction of the Supreme Court attaches, the court has full control of the cause, and can make such orders concerning it as may be necessary to preserve the rights of the parties and enforce its mandates. Its jurisdiction continues until the case is fully determined by the court and its judgment is completely executed by the court below. For the purpose of enforcing its mandates, it may make any order, and, if necessary, may resort to the writ of mandamus or any other
We are of opinion that the motion to dismiss the application for writ of error should be overruled, and that the order and judgment entered by the Court of Civil Appeals setting aside and vacating its former judgment аnd reversing and remanding the cause for a new trial should be held to be void and of no effect.
<&wkey;>For other cases see same topic and KEY-NUMBER in all Key-Numbered Digests and Indexes
