Holt v. Maverick
This text of 25 S.W. 607 (Holt v. Maverick) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Texas Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
The judgment of the District Court was Teversed and the cause remanded, but it does not appear that the ruling necessarily determines the cause.
A question arose, however, in the Court of Civil Appeals as to the disqualification of one of the judges of that court, and he declined to sit.
Jurisdiction of the Supreme Court to grant writ of error is claimed on the ground that the determination of the qualification of the judge involved the application and construction of the Constitution of this State.
That may be true, but the judge did not sit, and the validity of the action of the other judges did not depend on his sitting or refusing to .sit. This was decided in case of City of Austin v. Nalle, 85 Texas, 520, and writ of error will not be granted in order to pass upon a question already settled.
The application for writ of error will therefore be dismissed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
25 S.W. 607, 86 Tex. 457, 1894 Tex. LEXIS 408, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/holt-v-maverick-tex-1894.