Leonard Bros. v. Newton

101 S.W.2d 223, 129 Tex. 1, 1937 Tex. LEXIS 307
CourtTexas Supreme Court
DecidedFebruary 3, 1937
DocketNo. 6797
StatusPublished
Cited by12 cases

This text of 101 S.W.2d 223 (Leonard Bros. v. Newton) 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.

Bluebook
Leonard Bros. v. Newton, 101 S.W.2d 223, 129 Tex. 1, 1937 Tex. LEXIS 307 (Tex. 1937).

Opinion

Mr. Judge Taylor

delivered the opinion of the Commission of Appeals, Section B.

Defendant in error has filed a motion praying that the order granting the application for writ of error be set aside [2]*2and the application dismissed, for the reason that it appears the court was without jurisdiction to grant the writ.

It is pointed out in the motion that it does not appear from the application that the matter therein complained of by defendant in error was complained of in a motion for rehearing filed in the Court of Civil Appeals, or even that such motion was filed.

It is essential to the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court to review a case of this character for the application for the writ of error to show that a motion for rehearing was filed in the Court of Civil Appeals presenting the points on which the writ is asked. Knodel v. Equitable Life Ins. Co. (Com. App.), 221 S. W. 941; Employers Cas. Co. v. Roland (Com. App.), 1 S. W. (2d) 568; Blackmon v. Trail (Com. App.), 12 S. W. (2d) 967. See also in this connection City National Bank of Childress v. Phillips Petroleum Co., 124 Texas 456, 78 S. W. (2d) 567, and Grayce Oil Co. et al. v. Peterson et al., 128 Texas 550, 98 S. W. (2d) 781.

Upon a reexamination of the application for the writ we find it lacking in essential grounds of jurisdiction as pointed out in the motion. It is void of allegations of any grounds showing this court has authority to hear the case.

The writ was inadvertently granted. The order granting same is set aside and the application dismissed.

Opinion adopted by the Supreme Court February 3, 1937.

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

Related

Robinson v. Commercial Standard Insurance
123 S.W.2d 337 (Texas Supreme Court, 1939)
Texas Employers Insurance v. McNorton
122 S.W.2d 1043 (Texas Supreme Court, 1939)
Petroleum Casualty Co. v. Kincaid
122 S.W.2d 1048 (Texas Supreme Court, 1939)
Ramirez v. Salinas
117 S.W.2d 56 (Texas Supreme Court, 1938)
Glenn v. McCarty
107 S.W.2d 363 (Texas Supreme Court, 1938)
Thompson v. Enfield
108 S.W.2d 1110 (Texas Supreme Court, 1937)
Casualty Reciprocal Exchange v. Dawson
107 S.W.2d 994 (Texas Supreme Court, 1937)
Grand Lodge Colored Knights of Pythias v. Adams
107 S.W.2d 355 (Texas Supreme Court, 1937)
Williams v. Alliston
104 S.W.2d 847 (Texas Supreme Court, 1937)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
101 S.W.2d 223, 129 Tex. 1, 1937 Tex. LEXIS 307, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/leonard-bros-v-newton-tex-1937.