*1
y.
BOOKER
TOURTELOT
—
Documentary
(§ 340*)
distinctly specify
Evi
6.
Evidence
assignment
that
dence —Records
of Courts.
on, which must
grounds
relied
error
authorizing
court,'
copy of
a
A
an order of
incorporated
previously
been
as-
sell the
bank to
receiver
a national
the
sets
ler of the
Comptrol-
by
bank,
trial,
error not
and an
authenticated
motion for new
presented
Comp.
by
required
Currency,
as
U.
regarded as waived.
be
must
884,
re-
1901,
never
order was
but which
§
St.
any
merit
there is
not think
We do
any court,
is in-
made a minute
corded or
admissible
of
assignments,
remaining
for which
an
as
order
such order
establish
a
court
record.
overruled;
but,
on account
Evidence,
cases,
other
see
[Ed. Note.—For
pointed out,
above
error
Dig.
Dig.
1294r-1301;
340.*]
§
Dec.
§§
Cent.
re-
reversed,
is
trial
Judgment
Judgments—
(§ 518*) Foreign
7.
—
manded.
Attack.
Collateral
remanded.
Reversed and
objection
a
An
not
to such evidence
upon
attack
an order
collateral
proof
that
was
for there
ever made.
failure
Judgment,
cases, see
other
[Ed. Note.-—For
v. BOOKER.
al.
Dig.
et
962;
Dig.
518.*]
961,
§
Cent.
Dec.
§§
Foreign
Appeals
Judgment
(Court
El Paso.
of Texas.
(§ 934*)
of Civil
on
8.
—Actions
6,
Rehearing,
26,
Judgment
Nov.
1913. On
June
—Limitations.
1913.)
may be
of limitations
The statute
upon
aof
to an
in
sister
edy,
action
defense
Judgment
(§ 822*)
Judgments
of Fob-
1.
—
the rem-
affected
since such
eign
Sufficiency.
-State —
gov-
right,
therefore
not
money judgment,
in another
rendered
A
erned
the law of
forum.
upon
a
indebtedness
state
confession
cases,
Judgment,
other
[Ed. Note.—For
see
having
a
the defendant
without
been
1766-1768;
Dig.
Dig.
1764,
§
Dec.
§§
Cent.
filed,
that
laws
the
is
was
934.*]
state,
the court rendered
against
a
sentence
shows that
and which
party and
of one
in favor
Judgment
upon
Judg
(§
934*)
9.
—Actions
final,
definite,
other,
it is a
ment-Limitations.
binding upon the
law
sentence of
absolute
providing
3361,
1895, art.
Under Rev. St.
parties,
full faith
to which
is a
judg-
issued
not
execution
given.
credit must
judgment may
year,
ment within one
Judgment,
cases,
brought
see
Note. —Por other
[Ed.
revived
10
scire facias or action
within
1496-1500;
1488-1490,
Dig.
judg-
years
after,
Dec.
Cent.
§§
not
an
Dig.
foreign state,
§ 822.*]
more than 10
ment of
rendered
years prior to the commencement of the ac-
822*)—
35*)
Judgment
(§
2. Evidence
(f
—
tion,
is-
which execution
never
was
Fobeign
Judgment
State —Constitu
sued,
revived,
is barred.
never
tional
Pbovisions.
Judgment,
cases,
[Ed. Note.—For other
see
clause of the fed-
full faith
credit
The
Dig.
Dig.
1764, 1766-1768;
§
Cent.
Dec.
§§
Constitution,
re-
does not
§
article
eral
934.*]
judicial knowledge
quire
take
one
another; but,
when those laws
the laws
proved
was
judgment
Judgment
Judg
(§
910*)
—Actions
facts,
shown
ment-Limitations.
conformity
therewith,
(Rev.
1895, art.
Under
that article
St.
given
must be
same effect
3361),
itation
ment,
for
issued,
if no execution has been
the lim-
which it
ren-
would have
begins
judg-
entry
to run from
dered.
expiration
year
allowed
Evidence,
eases,
execution;
see
and,
[Ed.
other
Note. —For
execution has been
where
Judg
Dig.
35;*
Dig.
issued,
suance of the last
Dec.
§
Cent.
§§
the time runs from the
is-
date of the
Dig.
ment,
1500;
1454, 1488-1490, 1496-
execution,
§§
Cent.
within
time
Dig.
822.*]
§
Dec.
allowed
law.
Judgment,
cases,
other
[Ed. Note.—For
see
Banking
(§
287*)
Banks
—Receivebs
Dig.
Dig.
1732-1737;
910.*]
Cent.
Dee.
§§
§
—Sale
Assets —Oedeb
Coubt.
5234, pro-
Comp.
§
U. S.
St.
Under
(§ 84*)
11. Limitation
of Actions
—Accrual
viding
may sell
a national bank
receiver of
Party
Judgment.
—Absent
—Action
order,
an
bank
of a court
the assets
facts
defendant had
competent jurisdiction,
such order
of record
is
years
not resided
the
Texas for 10
next before
prerequisite
valid sale
receiver.
bringing
of an action
cases,
see Banks
foreign
prevent
opera-
aof
state does not
Dig.
1089-1104, 1126,
Banking,
Dec.
§§
Cent.
limitations,
tion of the statute of
absentee clause of the statute
Dig.
287.*]
§
apply
does
parties living
outside
nonresidents or
Wokds
Phbases —“Coubt
Recobd.”
right of
state
action.
of the accrual of
time
history of
A “court of record” is one the
writing
perpetuated
whose
cases,
Note.—For other
(quoting
[Ed.
see Limitation
by
and
duly
some
authorized
Words
Dig.
439-448;
Dig.
Actions,
1686-1688).
of
§
Cent.
pp.
§§
Phrases,
vol.
84.*]
—348*)
Documentary
(§
Evi
5. Evidence
—
Judgment
Foreign
Recobds
of Courts
of Sister
dence
States.
(§
—Actions
Judgment
—Limitations.
Records of the courts of
sister state
3359, providing
Rev. St.
art.
proved by copies
upon foreign judgments
thereof authenticated
actions
are bar-
required
Comp.
1901, 905,
St.
§
U. S.
laws of the state
red
where the
copies duly
must
witness, but it
Texas,
examined
some
shall be
was rendered
ment
be shown that
order has
that,
not,
first
so barred
and
action shall be
whether
proof
brought
thereof can
entered of record before
made in
one
who
pre-
of these forms.
in the state within
next
resided
ceding
upon any
action,
Evidence,
[Ed.
other
Note.—For
1361-1383;
rendered more than 10
348.*]
before.
Dig. Key-No.
Rep’r
topic
&
Series
Deo.
see same
ana
NUMBER in
Indexes
other cases
section
*For
*2
(Tes.
160 SOUTHWESTERN REPORTER
of the
of limita- der
other articles
and
cumulative
virtue of the
Bank
‘National
tion.
Congress
o'f
Act’
of
of
United States
Judgment,
cases,
see
America,
thereto,
amendatory
and acts
and
Dig.
Dig.
1764, 1766-1768;
Cent.
Dec.
§
§§
authorized to do
business
a national
934.*]
banking association, and ever
said
Judgment—
Judgment
(§
934*) Eoeeign
—
date,
up
day
April,
and
to the 23d
of
.
Provisions —Limitation
Constitutional
fed-
and
clause of the
The full faith'
credit
transacted and
dent to said national
on
carried
such business inci-
right of
eral Constitution does not restrict
banking
the.
association
prescribe
a reasonable
the state to
thereof;
whereas,
and
on or
about
judgments
period
of
actions
for
day
April, 1896,
23d
of
said national bank
sister states.
Judgment,
insolvent,
Comptroller
[Ed.
other
was
Currency
Note.—For
and
1764, 1766-1768; Dec.
§
§§
America,
of the United States of
934.*]
after due
examination of the affairs
Judgment
(§
For
—Actions
Bank,
said Grand Forks National
and there-
eign
—
Judgment
Limitation —Dormant
becoming
from
satisfied that
said Grand
Judgment.
insolvent,
in North
rendered
A
Forks National Bank was
or about the
on
did
Rev. Codes
dormant
which has become
day April, 1896,
23d
declare
5200,5210,
(N. D.)
of that
insolvency
exist,
and
did
and
assume
courts,
be enforced
cannot
as construed
charge
bank;
an
Texas.
action in
take
affairs
of said
Judgment,
cases; see
other
whereas,
[Ed. Note.—For
heretofore,
wit,
and
about
above-named
Dig. 928.*]
day
August, 1896,
15th
Court,
plaintiff
El Paso Coun-
Appeal
was,
Comptrol-
District
Judge.
ty
Wlalthall,
;
Currency
A. M.
ler
United States
and others America,
E.
Tourtelot
duly appointed
C.
Action
receiver of the
Judgment
against
for the
Booker.
L. E.
aforesaid,
Grand Forks National Bank
and
plaintiffs appeal. Affirmed.
defendant,
duly qualified
and
thereafter
upon
as such and entered
discharge
his
duties as
re-
appel-
Paso,
Scott,
for
El
MeBroom &
ceiver, and ever since said date has
and
Falvey,
Burges,
Turney
and
T. A.
lants.
still is such receiver and in
ap-
Paso,
Weeks,
El
all of
Stanton &
bank;
whereas,
capital
assets of said
and
pellee.
stock
the said
Forks
Grand
National Bank
Appellants
Tourtelot
McKENZIE,
E. C.
day
April, 1896,
J.
on the 23d
Hogan
on the 21st
filed this suit
and T. D.
2,000
par
each;
shares of the
value
$100
day
September,
in the district
whereas,
day
June,
on the 14th
appellee,
Tex.,
county,
of El Paso
Comptroller
Currency
said
Booker,
to recover
L. E.
America, having
United States of
ascertained
Dakota.
in a district court
assets, property,
and determined that the
jury upon plaintiff’s
before a
Trial was had
credits
said association were insufficient
original petition,
defend-
first amended
pay
liabilities,
provid-
and,
to
ed
its debts and
plaintiffs’
answer,
first and
ant’s
Congress,
said acts of
made
assess-
judg-
petitions.
supplemental
second
requisition upon
ment
the shareholders
as follows:
to be
ment sued
Bank,
of the said Grand Forks National
Forks, D.,
County
Grand
and
N.
each
$100
each
of Grand
“State
capital
Court,
share of the said
First Judicial
stock
District
Forks.
District. E. C.
by them, respectively,
Tourtelot,
held
time
owned
at the
as Receiver
default,
Forks,
of its
and at
Bank
time said
National
of Grand
Grand Forks
insolvent,
Plaintiff,
Booker, bank was found to be
and so de-
L. E.
Comptroller
clared
said
to be insolvent
Defendant.
aforesaid,
plaintiff
as
ceiver
and directed the
as re-
Judgment.
“Confession
proceed-
necessary
thereof
to take all
ings,
otherwise,
Booker,
county
city
“I,
enforce
L.
E.
liability
Dakota, extent
the said individual
of
do
Forks
Grand
shareholder^;
hereby
said
said
confess
favor
assessment
herein
necessary
Tourtelot,
because it was
to enable
E.
as receiver
the Grand
C.
pay
Bank,
Forks, D., the receiver to
said
debts and
N.
liabili-
Forks
for
Grand
National
Comptroller
ties,
$31,000,
and the said
mak-
the sum of
authorize
ing
said
me,
assessment found and decided that
therefor
ment
be entered
purpose
paying
legal
it was
for the
with
day
thereon from the 14th
liabilities,
July,
debts
D.
A.
1897. This confession of
said as-
requisition required
justly
owing
sessment and
is for
debt
due and
that payment
E. C. Tourtelot as receiver of
to the said
assessment
thereof be made to
July 14, 1897,
the
Forks,
facts,
Forks National Bank of
or before
Grand
Grand this
all
arising upon
D.,
following
thereof;
defendant had due
notice
whereas,
to wit: Whereas the said
the said
L.
Grand Forks and
E. Book-
was,
day
er,
April, 1896,
Bank
on or
the 6th
on the 23d
National
of
about
wás
.organized
days prior
February,
1885, duly
thereto,
D.
more
A.
than 30
un-
topic
Dig. Key-No.
Rep’r
*For other cases see same
NUMBERin
&Am.
section
Series &
Indexes
BOOKER
Court,
cap-
Hassell,
A. D. 1897. L. K.
Dist.
Clerk
is,
shares of
still
of 310
the owner
By
Deputy.
Hurst,
Seal.]”
[Dist.
A. C.
Court
National
Forks
ital stock of said Grand
Bank,
books
and the same stands
pe
substance,
alleged,'
trial
name;
where-
in his
association
*3
Tourtelot,
of
tition
the
of the
Forks,
the time
that the said
at
as,
thereof,
facts herein-
reason
and
recovery
judgment,
of
was receiver
said
forth,
defend-
before set
the above-named
Grand
Bank of
Grand
National
Forks
plaintiff
said
said
ant
indebted to
rendering
D.,N.
the court
and that
capital
said Grand
310 shares
stock of
having
record,
jurisdiction
judgment
the
general jurisdiction,
was
court of
$100
rate of
Forks National
at the
Bank
of
had
and
said
one of
and
and
each
person
of the sub
of. the defendant and
the
ject-matter,
$31,000;
stock,
sum of
shares of
in all the
laws of the
that under the
and
whereas,
and
defendant has
the said
judgment entered
state of North Dakota the
became
the amount in said
favor
part
paid
assessment, nor
the aforesaid
binding judgment for
valid and
thereof,
from
thereon
and there
now due
stipulated
judgment
in
plaintiff, by rea-
said defendant
said
and
Tourtelot as receiver
of said
aforesaid,
sum of
of
said
son
$31,000,
the facts
against
Booker,
that the said
the said
and
rate
with
thereon at
said Booker
as receiver and the
Tourtelot
cent,
July 14,
per
per
of
annum from
only parties
al
It was
to the suit.
were the
my
day August,
hand
10th
“Witness
this
alleged
this
so
suit the said
that at the time of
Booker,
A.
E.
Defendant.
D. 1897. Lewis
judgment
full
valid and of
was
County
Dakota,
“State of North
Grand
Da
force and virtue
kota,
the state
duly
being
Booker,
first
Forks —ss.: L. E.
judgment
Dako
in North
and that the
deposes
says
law,
according
sworn
that
and
aside;
appealed from nor
had not
set
ta
that no
signed
fore-
who
he is the
part
paid;
that
of it had been
going statement, and
he is the defend-
that
owing,
under
and
and
entire amount was due
the
the defendant.
named;
ant therein
he is indebted
that
against
laws of
enforceable
Texas was
of the
Forks,
the said E. C.
Grand Forks National
receiver
Tourtelot
alleged that-aft
It was also
Bank of
Grand
judgment
in the district
er
was obtained
said
D.,
$31,000,
with interest
sum of
of
re
Dakota the said Tourtelot
court of North
cent,
per
per
thereon
annum
at
rate
bank,
signed
that
as receiver
July 14, 1897,
from
there are no
and that
appointed
qualified
B.
one W. Wood was
as receiver
same,
and that the facts stated
offsets to
stead;
thereafter
his
foregoing
and statement
confession
acting
bank,
Wood, as receiver of said
said
L.
are true.
Booker.
E.
judgment,
authority,
proper
sold said
“Subscribed and sworn to
me this
assignment appel
due course
Milne,
day
August,
10th
1897. Jennie
same, and enti
owners of
lants became the
Notary
[Notarial Seal.]
Public.
recovery thereon, and
tled to
that under
Court, in
“To the
District
Clerk
said
laws of the state
North Dakota the
County
and for the
of North
the
are
Forks and State
Grand
per
judgment
rate of
bears interest
Dakota: Under and
virtue
cent,
ap
per
date, and
from its
annum
you
foregoing
statement,
confession and
pellants
of defendant
should recover
hereby
directed to enter
there-
judgment, with interest there
amount of the
in favor
cent,
said
therein
per
per annum.
on at 7
against
named,
said
defendant for
answered, alleging,
in sub-
$31,000,
the sum of
with
interest thereon
stance,
North Dakota
the district court of
cent, per
per
the rate of 7
annum from the
jurisdiction
deter-
was without
to hear and
day
together
July, 1897,
14th
costs of
with the
judg-
against him,
mine
or to enter
said cause
by you.
this action
taxed
against him, because was not served
he
ment
Forks,
Dakota,
Dated at Grand
Au-
any process issuing out of said
gust 27,
Judge
Fisk,
1897. Charles J.
pending,
appear-
nor did he enter
a suit then
District Court.
pending
ance or confess
foregoing
“In accordance with the
con-
judg-
against, him in said
and that the
judgment,
order for
fession
for said reason
null and
ment sued
judgment
plaintiff
hereby
in favor of the
10-year
.
also
void. Defendant
statute of
Dakota
Tourtelot, as
E. C.
receiver
the state of
limitation of
Forks,
National Bank of Grand
Grand Forks
the state
Texas as
de-
against
D.,
L.
recovery
E. Book-
appellants’
against
alleged
N.
er,
fense
$31,000
for the sum of
and interest on
judgment,
him
said
and further
day
July,
from
14th
said amount
had ever issued out
that no execution
cent,
per
per annum, being
judg-
at 7
North Dakota
said
said court
$259.19,
;
thereof,
sum
costs
disburse-
that said
ment
and
being
herein,
$2, making
the sum
ments
laws of the state of
virtue
$31,261.19.
Texas,
total
and of the state of
Dakota
North
dormant, void,
Fisk,
without force or effect
“Witness the Honorable Charles
J.
filing
suit,
judge
district,
First
of this
time of
of at the
my
plaintiffs
not be
re-
hand
and the seal of that
August,
was also
that the
27th
the district
this
cover thereon.
(Tes.
REPORTER
160 SOUTHWESTERN
tire
ed”
only
The
tions
instructed the
defendant,
close
was entered for defendant
the statutes of North
not resided in the state of Texas for 10 having
has been absent
the
the
judgment was entered. That under the laws
of limitation
tolled
exclusive
of North Dakota the
for
entry
as
sided out of said
of his absence shall
shall
mencement of such action.” That since the
commenced within
son into the
tively
action shall accrue
shall be out of the
tiffs’
ment.
which statute is as follows: “Section 5210.
of action shall have accrued such
and remain
when the
kota
the
applicable to
alleged,
ant further
Exception.
Dakota to
effect,
was barred at the time
this
themselves of the
statutes of
Dakota and of this state
plaintiffs
ment,
the
state
ed to
them in
any
Appellants’
The case was tried with a
judgments,
any part
judgment by affidavit,
state
operation
assignment,
act
necessary
plaintiffs’ supplemental petitions
recovering
suit;
depart
thereunder, brings
next before the
revive said
limited
Dakota,
or to
they may
as
Dakota,
space
in substance: That
statute which
the court’s refusal to
the state of North
suspended.
means for
*4
provided-
jury to
keep
which was
testimony
limitation of the
Absentee.
from and
keep
Texas,
of the time
required by
state;
first
continuously
but was
judgments
their
jury
after
of said
the
to notice favor of the defendant was defendant,
and
do
one
state North
plaintiffs
same
with
therefrom ever since said
assignment
return
right
the term's
general
and that the renewal of
predecessors in
so has
and if after such cause
the return
for
against any person,
the renewal or revival
That the defendant has the indebtedness was made
the two and four
year more,
running
and that
the court
reside out
that
absent from that
return
only
If,
prevents
the defendant has re-
in
statute
filing
done,
limited
trial.
to revive said
into
such action
the laws
under
force North Da-
when the
absent
accordingly.
expired.
verdict for
cumulative.
the
deemed or taken ployed
had not availed
several
while
jury.
as recovered
provided
the
of error
of this suit in
review
the statutes
of state
herein
questions
institution of
of limitation
was not the
peremptorily
peremptorily
for
time within
the
or
statutes
verdict for
the
the
therefrom
force
After the
this state
such
title
the com-
suspends
the time ology
deem
proposi-
or to
laws
Defend-
may
is bas- and of the
respec-
person
it was
period
period
them.
plain-
North that
state,
year
fail- volved
per-
en-
in-
he
be
do
it credit shall
public
stitution,
such
this state.
which had
ed,
would
was obtained
cedure
is
for us to
some constitutional
North
state
it
North Dakota
court
forms
final
It is
We are of
validity
is,
and its
that the sentence is
ferentially,
the more
form.
ed
the court.
not
duce
ion that
stance
same
the
parties;
law.
of the
leaves
Apparently
be tested
the
its
are further of
it
adverse
against
definite, final, and absolute
to
special exceptions.
and decisive of the
of that state
appears
is a sentence
expressly
Am. Dec.
rendition
sustain
law of
state North
err
nature
it is our
true that
judgment.
Under article
would
substance
adjudicating
faith
We
conforms
should be
acts,
Being money judgment,
nothing
Dakota, that
recovery
state of North
and
judgment appears
Its form is not
application
evidence the
that
the
parties,
it
void because of that fact.
and as such it must be
the
say,
modern
the above
every
that
that
jurisdiction
permitting
form.
and credit in this
records
the
the
not be
any particular
other,
opinion
filed, yet
judgment
its substance rather
provided
to
Cyc.
in the absence of
to be
provision
state,
appeal,
judicial
it
is
given
judgment
of a
used,
case should
1 Black
Scott v.
be
in
scope
entry
accordance with
doctrine,
shows
stipulated
It
the law and
suit was filed
4, 1,
the matter in
by statute,
Nor is it
p.
authorized,
to
inhibition
case.
determined in the future.
the face
We
and
that
favor
such
the affidavit
gauged by
requirements,
court rendered
at the
appears
and is
that the
laws North Dakota
Dakota.
in a court of
but
very
which we think vital
was valid
that “full
of the
character of the
judicial proceedings
is sufficient in
under the laws of
directly,
the defendant.
Burton,
apparently
United States Con
has the sanction of
each
to be
plaintiffs
in
controversy
and at the time of
Hamman v.
binding
material,
terms
also of the
outset, however,
and
Judgments,
clearly
sentence
such
without
essential
the absence of
therefrom that
of the state of
state
subject-matter
the
language
or that same
state to the
regular,
adjudication,
According
procedure
controversy.
certain,
proof
the amount
and
act of the
faith and
confessing
one
procedure
given
court did
it
as
to intro
than its
As
laws
indicate
between
it
and as
phrase
provid
record
not
is not
before
it has
to
toas
party
Lew
stat
opin
to
is to
is a
is a
pro
sued
con
sub
§
and
act,
em
the
the
in
its
v. BOOKER
Constitution
This,
proved,
matters
be
take
then becomes
such
judgment
tained; and,
tained was in
receiver,
ed,
ed
ficient if
pellants
The
court
sale of the
the sale
authorizing
clusive
a
Warren
a sale or
lows:
conclusive in that state
pose
by
Forks National Bank of Grand
evidence in all
thorizing
with his seal of
bank then in
a
two hundred and
utes of
and
all
nals.
conveyance
section 884 of
copies
ever
Statutes of
have
clerk’s
coming
tion has
hundred and
Section 5234 of United States
or wafer.”
[3]
copy
every
copy
proved
cases
law
courts of another
paper
Currency,
authenticated
judicial knowledge
faith
It
petition
been ever filed with
that such laws
entered
signed by
state
authorizing
An
is to
petition
in
satisfied,
office
course,
“Every
Comptroller
for it is well-settled
1901, provides
B.
other state.”
sought
refused to
papers
of
minutes
shall be
Warren
would
impression
this state.
fact,
disposition
contended
shall
judgment by
usage
it
Wood, receiver,
the sale
executed
be considered
an order dated
evidence
order
implies
remaining
twenty-seven,-
in
the hands
is shown
in the minutes of
original copy
conformity
credit
does
and order
which,
one
certificate,
pursuance
places
assets
any court,
acted
which section reads as fol
office,
as
duty
of the
B.
was.
order were authenticated
his
twenty-six
specified
not mean
should
given
pay
United
prove
“O. J.
valid
Wood,
equally
by
the said
office,
receiver make the
This
like other
that the
in fact obtained.
state where rendered.
as follows:
upon,
where
assets
such seal
of
shall be
court;
offering
nothing
appellants that,
any
the same
as made on wax
do
be filed
the bank
Fisk,
assignment,
States
seeking
circulating
provision
courts;
receiver,
of a
Currency
state where ob-
nor
certified
law,
but
valid and con-
Comptroller
Compiled
court or
assets
September 22,
it was
was valid
laws of North
judgments
court to
receiver,
sections
seal,
Forks,
rule in this
any
Judge,”
in evidence
received
facts,
was either
petition
directly
when once
the Grand
more
any
we
being
or
appear
Compiled would
effect
fifty-two jurisdiction
to make
have
laws,
shall
“On
and all
associa- authenticated
render-
record
by
to dis
sealed
origi
court.
order
N. D.
must
Stat-
fifty-
than
give
also
suf
him
Ap necessary prerequisite
ob-
au
be-
by ords,
by association,
in
in
receiver,
ler,
bility
may
belonging
Turner v.
Treasurer of the
the order
such
must be had and obtained This order
debts, and,
insolvent bank is
proceedings.”
real and
tion,
position
22;
200;
434;
v.
Tex.
assets of
er,
required
report
court
*5
thority
775;
piled
C.)
Ct.
perpetuated
.recover
court.
have failed to show that
They
nor sufficient evidence to
that there was such an order. The
that collateral attack could not be made as
were found in said
assignment,
any fact, and we hold that
the
troller
cause,
etc., Beilharz, 88
there was
same
against
ed,
cannot attack
court
mean, however, that
court of record can be made
the record. There must first be shown that
tire
would be
were never
corded or made a
action.
year
North Dakota in bar of
shows
entered on the 27th
sued
son
[7]
[6]
but in this
papers
assets
want
whereof it was insufficient to
failed to connect
statute of
the trial the defendant
were
Appellants
has
authorizing
because said
68 Tex.
They
the order if the order had been
He
no
been
are of
not
such an
which were
not
inadmissible
was a dormant
filed
also
with same.
proof
execution has ever issued
were inadmissible as
action. The
case there
shown to be the records of
said bank.
admissible
collaterally
entered
limitation
contend that the defendant
opinion
the sale
S.
papers themselves,
minute
judgment,
5 S.
any court,
W.
authority
proof
themselves, by proper
Comptroller’s office,
is
they
prove
W.
that said
plaintiffs’
officeof
It
undisputed
a failure of
of in
evidence.
evidence in this
of an
both
pleaded
are entitled to
might
August, 1897,
extraneous
minutes.
This does
rendered
a because
sale.
order of
for the
nor
receiver
Texas
any
St.
is an
copies
plaintiffs
order
cause
proof
ever
be true
support
Comp
*6
Louis,
which and
court.
proof
proof
prov
They
sale,
rea-
any
not
en
10-
re
of foreign
of
of
of according
these remarks.
situs of
after.
is
instituted,
tation are to be
nation for its own convenience and
Limitations
statute
the law of the
are to be
ly well settled
where
formity
the
may
of
after the date
fashioned
by
the 10
It is then
By
where execution has not
months
and it
are to be
to the law of
cution
and manner of the
Bank,
against
date of the
[9, According
not
its own views of
a
law,’
rendition of
10]
debt, brought
obliged
they
has
years
has not
Revised Statutes
terms
nation. As a
contract.
after the rendition
revived
a
operates
nature of the remedies and
says
interpreted by
barred. Wilcox v. First National
regulated
and not
are
order from mere
issuance of
(2d
from
its
the universal
contract,
Story, J.,
the
issued within months after
forum,
he,
made;
* * * This
Ed.)
that remedies
own
depart
a
merely
The,
considered
place
the date
proceedings
judgment,
an action
‘are instituted
justice
scire
to our
by
thereon
commences to run
wants
statute
revived
rule,
the
controls.” Wood
’
reason of
from own notions
last execution there-
is
the law of the
W.
where the
facias,
judgment,
p.
upon
pursued according
not
issued within
obvious.
law of
rule
statutes,
and customs.
statutes of
within
12
just mentioned,
its
is a rule
thereon
such
comity
to fall
the law of
propriety,
rule
on contracts
or an action
that,
scire
Limitation
judgment,
judgment,
art.
the
by
regulated
is in con
10
action is
and not
remedy,
benefit,
‘Courts
if exe
within
within
as the
facias
equal
years
place
place
from
rule,
limi
time
any
It
BOOKER
of this
Notes
[8] was admitted Clay, on the 21st 560; Spann Tilliard v. May 1, nor has 10 L. Ed. plaintiffs is well 13 Tex. ever Barrett, Snoddy revive this state has resided same, since said action on resided residing McElmoyle Hall, settled as a 195; August 27, 1897, or their until the been Crummerford, same, 11 Tex. Civ. v. fact outside of said Allison v. without said may Cage, personal time rendered, September, predecessors Cyc. or to this state the statute 480; Cohen, filing the state 5 Tex. 61; App. Nash, contracts bring 20 Tex. Reid trial taken state. of a Clay 106; date non- de- “It U. of in v.