Forbes v. Cannon

Court of Appeals of Texas

Forbes v. Cannon

224 S.W. 944, 1920 Tex. App. LEXIS 963

CourtCourt of Appeals of Texas

DecidedOctober 20, 1920

DocketNo. 6434.

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 224 S.W. 944 (Forbes v. Cannon) 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

Forbes v. Cannon, 224 S.W. 944, 1920 Tex. App. LEXIS 963 (Tex. Ct. App. 1920).

Pincite

Opinion

COBBS, J.

Appellee files a motion to dismiss this cause upon two grounds: (1) That no brief was filed in the trial court; and (2) no brief was filed in this court “as required by the statutes and rules of court” — and for authority to sustain the motion cites the following cases: R. S. 2115; Rules of Court of Civil Appeals, No. 39; Rules of District Court, No. 102; Railway v. Jefferson, 201 S. W. 211.

This case had been regularly set down for submission on October 6, 1920. The order overruling plea of privilege, from which this appeal is taken, was entered 'the 3d day of March, 1920, and the record filed in this court on the 9th day of June, 1920. No brief was filed by appellant until this court convened upon Monday, the 4th of October, 1920, and upon the same day, October <(, 1920, appellee’s said motion was filed. No reason or excuse is tendered as to why this record remained here a period of quite four months without a brief. This is an appeal from Jim Wells county, where the attorneys for appellee reside, and a remote county, and we cannot say that there was sufficient time given, appellee in which to secure copy of appellant’s brief and to prepare and file a reply brief.

The motion is granted, and the appeal is dismissed.

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

COBBS, J.

Appellee files a motion to dismiss this cause upon two grounds: (1) That no brief was filed in the trial court; and (2) no brief was filed in this court “as required by the statutes and rules of court” — and for authority to sustain the motion cites the following cases: R. S. 2115; Rules of Court of Civil Appeals, No. 39; Rules of District Court, No. 102; Railway v. Jefferson, 201 S. W. 211.

This case had been regularly set down for submission on October 6, 1920. The order overruling plea of privilege, from which this appeal is taken, was entered 'the 3d day of March, 1920, and the record filed in this court on the 9th day of June, 1920. No brief was filed by appellant until this court convened upon Monday, the 4th of October, 1920, and upon the same day, October <(, 1920, appellee’s said motion was filed. No reason or excuse is tendered as to why this record remained here a period of quite four months without a brief. This is an appeal from Jim Wells county, where the attorneys for appellee reside, and a remote county, and we cannot say that there was sufficient time given, appellee in which to secure copy of appellant’s brief and to prepare and file a reply brief.

The motion is granted, and the appeal is dismissed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

224 S.W. 944, 1920 Tex. App. LEXIS 963, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/forbes-v-cannon-texapp-1920.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack