Ables v. Pearle

10 Tex. 285
Texas Supreme Court·Decided July 1, 1853·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

LIPSCOMB, J.

Tiie only error assigned that it is necessary to notice is, that the court erred in dismissing the certiorari after a Term had intervened, on the authority of Dunn v. O’Brien, (5 Tex. R., 570,) and Steinlein v. Dial, decided at the present Term. The motion to dismiss or quash the writ of certiorari could not bo made after the return Term. The judgment is reversed and the cause remanded to the District Court.

Beversed and remanded.

Note. 55. — Steinlein v. Dial, ante 268.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Ables v. Pearle, 10 Tex. 285 (Tex. 1853).

10 Tex. 285 (Ables v. Pearle) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

G., C. & S. F. R'y Co. v. Conner
2 Wilson 98 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1884)