Laird v. Frieberg, Klien & Co.
This text of 2 Wilson 99 (Laird v. Frieberg, Klien & 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.
Opinion
Opinion by
§ 110. Appeal bond injustice’s court; time of filing. If an appeal bond in justice’s court be filed within ten days, after an order overruling a motion for new trial in the case, it is filed within the time required by law. [Ante, § 49.]
§ 111. Same; description of judgment in. The appeal bond described the judgment by stating the style and number of the case, and the date of the judgment, correctly. In stating the amount of the judgment there was a discrepancy of one cent. The judgment was for $(>1.91, while the bond described it as a judgment for $61.90. Held, that this discrepancy did not vitiate the bond. [W. & W. Con. Rep. § 1236.]
§ 112. Same; conditions of. The bond was conditioned that appellant would prosecute his appeal “'with effect ” instead of “to effect.” Held, this did not vitiate the bond. [Franklin v. Tiernan, 56 Tex. 618.] The county court held the appeal bond insufficient and dismissed the appeal. Held, error.
Eeversed and remanded.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
2 Wilson 99, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/laird-v-frieberg-klien-co-texapp-1884.