Holcomb v. Copeland

118 S.W.2d 932, 1938 Tex. App. LEXIS 54
Court of Appeals of Texas·Decided June 16, 1938·No. No. 3711.·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Plaintiffs in error having filed no briefs upon this writ of error, the same is dis *933 missed for want of prosecution. Haynes v. J. M. Radford Grocery Co., 118 Tex. 277, 14 S.W.2d 811.

Dismissed.

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

Holcomb v. Copeland, 118 S.W.2d 932, 1938 Tex. App. LEXIS 54 (Tex. Ct. App. 1938).

118 S.W.2d 932 (Holcomb v. Copeland) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Dixieland Petroleum Corp. v. Brown
216 S.W.2d 235 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1948)