Berry v. State

Court of Appeals of Texas

Berry v. State

79 S.W.2d 891

CourtCourt of Appeals of Texas

DecidedFebruary 27, 1935

DocketNo. 9527

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 79 S.W.2d 891 (Berry v. State) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Texas primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Berry v. State, 79 S.W.2d 891 (Tex. Ct. App. 1935).

Pincite

Opinion

BICKETT, Chief Justice.

The order of the district court, from which an appeal has been attempted to be perfected, was a temporary restraining order and not a temporary injunction.

Under our practice, there is no appeal from a temporary restraining order. Article 4662, Revised Civil Statutes of Texas (1925); Riggins v. Thompson, 96 Tex. 154, 71 S. W. 14; Ex parte Zuccaro, 106 Tex. 197, 163 S. W. 579, Ann. Cas. 1917B, 121; Lark v. Coyle (Tex. Civ. App.) 260 S. W. 1107; Johnson v. Sunset Stores, Inc. (Tex. Civ. App.) 27 S.W.(2d) 644.

The appeal is therefore dismissed for want of jurisdiction.

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

BICKETT, Chief Justice.

The order of the district court, from which an appeal has been attempted to be perfected, was a temporary restraining order and not a temporary injunction.

Under our practice, there is no appeal from a temporary restraining order. Article 4662, Revised Civil Statutes of Texas (1925); Riggins v. Thompson, 96 Tex. 154, 71 S. W. 14; Ex parte Zuccaro, 106 Tex. 197, 163 S. W. 579, Ann. Cas. 1917B, 121; Lark v. Coyle (Tex. Civ. App.) 260 S. W. 1107; Johnson v. Sunset Stores, Inc. (Tex. Civ. App.) 27 S.W.(2d) 644.

The appeal is therefore dismissed for want of jurisdiction.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

79 S.W.2d 891, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/berry-v-state-texapp-1935.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack