Fort Worth Mut. Benev. Ass'n v. McDonald

282 S.W. 668, 1926 Tex. App. LEXIS 375
Court of Appeals of Texas·Decided March 11, 1926·No. No. 1858.·Published

Opinion

WALTHALR, J.

In this appeal the record fails to disclose that notice of appeal was given in the court below. This is a jurisdictional matter. Article 2253, R. S. 1925.

This appeal will be, and it is, ordered dismissed, unless within 20 days from this date satisfactory evidence be adduced showing ■that in fact due notice of appeal was given as by law required. Tel. Co. v. O’Keefe, 28 S. W. 945, 87 Tex. 423; Luse v. Parmer (Tex. Civ. App.) 221 S. W. 1031.

On Vacation of Order of Dismissal.

Satisfactory evidence having been adduced showing that in fact due notice of appeal was given in the court below, as by law required, the order of dismissal heretofore made in this case is set aside, and we now proceed to hear the case on its merits.

There is no assignment of errors found in the record, and the clerk of the district court from which this- appeal is prosecuted certifies that there was no assignment of errors filed in this cause in that court.

In the' condition of the record as above indicated, this court will not consider any error but one of law apparent upon the face of the record. Pinding no such error, the case is affirmed.

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

Fort Worth Mut. Benev. Ass'n v. McDonald, 282 S.W. 668, 1926 Tex. App. LEXIS 375 (Tex. Ct. App. 1926).

282 S.W. 668 (Fort Worth Mut. Benev. Ass'n v. McDonald) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Western Union Telegraph Co. v. O'Keefe
28 S.W. 945 (Texas Supreme Court, 1894)
Luse v. Parmer
221 S.W. 1031 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1920)