Harrell v. Tilley

Court of Appeals of Texas

Harrell v. Tilley

111 S.W.2d 736, 1937 Tex. App. LEXIS 1488

CourtCourt of Appeals of Texas

DecidedDecember 9, 1937

DocketNo. 3229.

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 111 S.W.2d 736 (Harrell v. Tilley) 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

Harrell v. Tilley, 111 S.W.2d 736, 1937 Tex. App. LEXIS 1488 (Tex. Ct. App. 1937).

Pincite

Opinion

WALKER, Chief Justice.

On the 6th day of March, 1937, Hon. C. E. Brazil, judge of the district court of Angelina county, entered his order in this case refusing to dissolve a temporary writ of injunction theretofore granted by him, restraining the enforcement of a judgment recovered by appellant, Alexander Film Company, against appellee, Joe Tilley, in justice court. From that order appellant attempted to appeal to this court, but did not file its transcript in this court until the 15th day of April.

We sustain appellee’s motion to dismiss the appeal; the transcript was filed too late to confer jurisdiction upon this court. Article 4662, R.S.1925; McFaddin v. Neches Canal Company, Tex.Civ.App., 278 S.W. 931; 3 Tex.J. 732, 733, and the many authorities therein cited.

Appeal dismissed.

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

WALKER, Chief Justice.

On the 6th day of March, 1937, Hon. C. E. Brazil, judge of the district court of Angelina county, entered his order in this case refusing to dissolve a temporary writ of injunction theretofore granted by him, restraining the enforcement of a judgment recovered by appellant, Alexander Film Company, against appellee, Joe Tilley, in justice court. From that order appellant attempted to appeal to this court, but did not file its transcript in this court until the 15th day of April.

We sustain appellee’s motion to dismiss the appeal; the transcript was filed too late to confer jurisdiction upon this court. Article 4662, R.S.1925; McFaddin v. Neches Canal Company, Tex.Civ.App., 278 S.W. 931; 3 Tex.J. 732, 733, and the many authorities therein cited.

Appeal dismissed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

111 S.W.2d 736, 1937 Tex. App. LEXIS 1488, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/harrell-v-tilley-texapp-1937.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack