Ditmar v. Beckham

Court of Appeals of Texas

Ditmar v. Beckham

77 S.W.2d 893

Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Ditmar v. Beckham. Read the opinion of the Court — 86 S.W.2d 801 →

Court of Appeals of Texas·Decided December 21, 1934·No. No. 13218·Published

Opinion

LATTIMORE, Justice.

The record contains two citations in error. The first was attempted to be served after ten days from its issuance. The other writ had no statement in it to show how many prior writs had been issued as re[894] quired by article 2232, R. S., other than the indorsement on it by the issuing clerk that it was an “alias writ.” This, according to Webster’s dictionary, means “second writ.” It was in fact the second writ. We think this is sufficient, since the statute makes no specification as to the manner in which the writ shall indicate how many previous citations have been issued.

The motion to dismiss the appeal is overruled.

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

LATTIMORE, Justice.

The record contains two citations in error. The first was attempted to be served after ten days from its issuance. The other writ had no statement in it to show how many prior writs had been issued as re[894] quired by article 2232, R. S., other than the indorsement on it by the issuing clerk that it was an “alias writ.” This, according to Webster’s dictionary, means “second writ.” It was in fact the second writ. We think this is sufficient, since the statute makes no specification as to the manner in which the writ shall indicate how many previous citations have been issued.

The motion to dismiss the appeal is overruled.

Ditmar v. Beckham, 77 S.W.2d 893 (Tex. Ct. App. 1934).

Pincite

77 S.W.2d 893 (Ditmar v. Beckham) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.