
    Eliza Holt v. James T. Wood.
    A judgment, that the defendant recover of the plaintiff, all costs in this behalf expended, &c'., does not dispose of the matter in controversy; and is not such a final judgment, as will support an appeal, or writ of error.
    Error from Hunt. Tried below before the Hon. William S. Todd.
    This was a suit, commenced by the plaintiff in error, against the defendant, before a justice of the peace, on an account under one hundred dollars, wherein there was a judgment in his favor for $44.50. The cause was removed to the District Court by certiorari, and upon a trial in that court, there was a verdict for the defendant in error. The judgment entered on this verdict, is given in the opinion of the court.
    
      Stephen Reaves, for the plaintiff in error.
   Bell, J.

The judgment of the court below in this cause was, that the defendant, James T. Wood, have, and recover of -the' plaintiff, Eliza Holt, all the costs in this behalf expended, &c. The decree does not dispose of the subject-matter of the controversy between the parties, and is not therefore, such a final judgment as will support an appeal, or writ of error. In conformity with the practice of this court, established by many decisions, the writ of error must be dismissed. (See Hanks v. Thompson, 5 Texas Rep. 6; Warren v. Shuman, Id. 441; Hancock v. Metz, 7 Id. 177 ; Bradshaw v. Davis, 8 Id. 344.) It-is ordered accordingly.

Writ dismissed.  