Copus v. Chorn

Court of Appeals of Texas

Copus v. Chorn

153 S.W.2d 498, 1941 Tex. App. LEXIS 688

CourtCourt of Appeals of Texas

DecidedJune 13, 1941

DocketNo. 2108

StatusPublished

This text of 153 S.W.2d 498 (Copus v. Chorn) 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

Copus v. Chorn, 153 S.W.2d 498, 1941 Tex. App. LEXIS 688 (Tex. Ct. App. 1941).

Pincite

Opinion

FUNDERBURK, Justice.

Because of the disposition required to be made of the case, it will be unnecessary to make a statement as to the nature of the suit.

While the case was pending in this court, before submission, defendants in error made a motion to dismiss on the ground that this court was without jurisdiction. The questions presented by that motion were determined by this court, as shown by majority and minority opinions, reported in 145 S.W.2d 958. Subsequently, in answer to certified questions, the Supreme Court, in effect, held that the Court of Civil Appeals is without jurisdiction to determine the merits of a case prosecuted upon writ of error when plaintiffs in error participated in the trial of the case, unless writ of error was perfected on or prior to January 1, 1940. In other words, as applied to the facts of this case, that the plaintiffs in error’s right to review did not exist. Copus v. Chorn, Tex.Sup., 150 S.W.2d 70. Upon the authority of that decision, we are required to dismiss the writ of error. It is accordingly so ordered.

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

FUNDERBURK, Justice.

Because of the disposition required to be made of the case, it will be unnecessary to make a statement as to the nature of the suit.

While the case was pending in this court, before submission, defendants in error made a motion to dismiss on the ground that this court was without jurisdiction. The questions presented by that motion were determined by this court, as shown by majority and minority opinions, reported in 145 S.W.2d 958. Subsequently, in answer to certified questions, the Supreme Court, in effect, held that the Court of Civil Appeals is without jurisdiction to determine the merits of a case prosecuted upon writ of error when plaintiffs in error participated in the trial of the case, unless writ of error was perfected on or prior to January 1, 1940. In other words, as applied to the facts of this case, that the plaintiffs in error’s right to review did not exist. Copus v. Chorn, Tex.Sup., 150 S.W.2d 70. Upon the authority of that decision, we are required to dismiss the writ of error. It is accordingly so ordered.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

153 S.W.2d 498, 1941 Tex. App. LEXIS 688, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/copus-v-chorn-texapp-1941.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack