Fontana v. T. S. Reed Grocery Co.

Court of Appeals of Texas

Fontana v. T. S. Reed Grocery Co.

208 S.W. 933, 1919 Tex. App. LEXIS 175

CourtCourt of Appeals of Texas

DecidedFebruary 12, 1919

DocketNo. 425.

StatusPublished

Cited by4 cases

This text of 208 S.W. 933 (Fontana v. T. S. Reed Grocery Co.) 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

Fontana v. T. S. Reed Grocery Co., 208 S.W. 933, 1919 Tex. App. LEXIS 175 (Tex. Ct. App. 1919).

Pincite

Opinion

WALKER, J.

This case is before us on motion to affirm on certificate. The appeal bond in this case was filed on the 8th day of March, 1918; hence this appeal was returnable at the preceding term of this court. This motion was not filed in this case until the 23d of July, 1918.

As stated by Judge Hendricks in First National Bank of Wellington v. Hix, 156 S. W. 535:

“This matter is controlled by the decision in the case of Laughlin v. Dabney, 86 Tex. 120, 24 S. W. 259, by the Supreme Court, holding that ‘the appellee, or defendant in error, as the case may be, must file his certificate at the term of the court to which the appeal or writ of error is returnable.’ ” Chambers v. Grisham, 155 S. W. 959; Holland v. Brown & McFarland, 152 S. W. 1195; Thorn v. Lanier, 57 Tex. Civ. App. 67, 121 S. W. 715; Western Union Telegraph Co. v. Wofford, 32 Tex. Civ. App. 427, 72 S. W. 620, 74 S. W. 943; Pickett v. Mead, 25 S. W. 656; Berry v. Blankenship, 30 Tex. 380.

Motion to affirm denied.

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

WALKER, J.

This case is before us on motion to affirm on certificate. The appeal bond in this case was filed on the 8th day of March, 1918; hence this appeal was returnable at the preceding term of this court. This motion was not filed in this case until the 23d of July, 1918.

As stated by Judge Hendricks in First National Bank of Wellington v. Hix, 156 S. W. 535:

“This matter is controlled by the decision in the case of Laughlin v. Dabney, 86 Tex. 120, 24 S. W. 259, by the Supreme Court, holding that ‘the appellee, or defendant in error, as the case may be, must file his certificate at the term of the court to which the appeal or writ of error is returnable.’ ” Chambers v. Grisham, 155 S. W. 959; Holland v. Brown & McFarland, 152 S. W. 1195; Thorn v. Lanier, 57 Tex. Civ. App. 67, 121 S. W. 715; Western Union Telegraph Co. v. Wofford, 32 Tex. Civ. App. 427, 72 S. W. 620, 74 S. W. 943; Pickett v. Mead, 25 S. W. 656; Berry v. Blankenship, 30 Tex. 380.

Motion to affirm denied.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

208 S.W. 933, 1919 Tex. App. LEXIS 175, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/fontana-v-t-s-reed-grocery-co-texapp-1919.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack