Huntsinger v. Gates Rubber Co.

Court of Appeals of Texas

Huntsinger v. Gates Rubber Co.

149 S.W.2d 632, 1941 Tex. App. LEXIS 191

CourtCourt of Appeals of Texas

DecidedMarch 10, 1941

DocketNo. 5274.

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 149 S.W.2d 632 (Huntsinger v. Gates Rubber Co.) 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

Huntsinger v. Gates Rubber Co., 149 S.W.2d 632, 1941 Tex. App. LEXIS 191 (Tex. Ct. App. 1941).

Pincite

Opinion

STOKES, Justice.

This case is before us upon the transcript, but no statement of facts -appears in the record. Neither the appellant nor the appellee has filed a brief, but appellee has filed a motion in which he asks that the judgment of the trial court be affirmed and that he have judgment against the sureties on the supersedeas bond. We have examined the record' and find that the cause of action is one of which the trial court had jurisdiction and no fundamental error appears. The motion of appellee will, therefore, be granted, the judgment of *633 the court below affirmed, and judgment here rendered against the sureties on appellant’s supersedeas bond for the full amount of the judgment below. Art. 1857, R.C.S., 1925; Cockburn v. Hightower,. Chief Justice, et al., 121 Tex. 555, 52 S.W.2d 365; Beauty Service Corporation v. Davis, Tex.Civ.App., 116 S.W.2d 463.

Affirmed with judgment against sureties.

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

STOKES, Justice.

This case is before us upon the transcript, but no statement of facts -appears in the record. Neither the appellant nor the appellee has filed a brief, but appellee has filed a motion in which he asks that the judgment of the trial court be affirmed and that he have judgment against the sureties on the supersedeas bond. We have examined the record' and find that the cause of action is one of which the trial court had jurisdiction and no fundamental error appears. The motion of appellee will, therefore, be granted, the judgment of *633 the court below affirmed, and judgment here rendered against the sureties on appellant’s supersedeas bond for the full amount of the judgment below. Art. 1857, R.C.S., 1925; Cockburn v. Hightower,. Chief Justice, et al., 121 Tex. 555, 52 S.W.2d 365; Beauty Service Corporation v. Davis, Tex.Civ.App., 116 S.W.2d 463.

Affirmed with judgment against sureties.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

149 S.W.2d 632, 1941 Tex. App. LEXIS 191, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/huntsinger-v-gates-rubber-co-texapp-1941.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack