Martin v. Irvin

Court of Appeals of Texas

Martin v. Irvin

147 S.W. 1164, 1912 Tex. App. LEXIS 529

CourtCourt of Appeals of Texas

DecidedJune 5, 1912

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 147 S.W. 1164 (Martin v. Irvin) 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

Martin v. Irvin, 147 S.W. 1164, 1912 Tex. App. LEXIS 529 (Tex. Ct. App. 1912).

Pincite

Opinion

KEY, O. J.

This is a motion asking this court to isssue a writ of certiorari to compel the county clerk of Bell county to prepare and deliver to appellant or his attorney a transcript, in order that an appeal may be properly prosecuted. The motion or application does not ask that the clerk be cited and given a hearing, and asks for no other relief than a writ of certiorari.

Appellant attempts to show that he perfected his appeal by filing a pauper’s oath in lieu of an appeal bond, and that the clerk has refused to prepare the transcript, after being requested so to do. As a general rule, when an- officer refuses to perform a ministerial duty, the remedy to compel performance of such duty is a mandamus proceeding directly against such officer; and we hold that appellant has mistaken his remedy, and that he should have pursued that course in this case. Newton v. Leal, 56 S. W. 209; In re Lawrence Estate, 146 S. W. 701.

Motion overruled.

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

KEY, O. J.

This is a motion asking this court to isssue a writ of certiorari to compel the county clerk of Bell county to prepare and deliver to appellant or his attorney a transcript, in order that an appeal may be properly prosecuted. The motion or application does not ask that the clerk be cited and given a hearing, and asks for no other relief than a writ of certiorari.

Appellant attempts to show that he perfected his appeal by filing a pauper’s oath in lieu of an appeal bond, and that the clerk has refused to prepare the transcript, after being requested so to do. As a general rule, when an- officer refuses to perform a ministerial duty, the remedy to compel performance of such duty is a mandamus proceeding directly against such officer; and we hold that appellant has mistaken his remedy, and that he should have pursued that course in this case. Newton v. Leal, 56 S. W. 209; In re Lawrence Estate, 146 S. W. 701.

Motion overruled.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

147 S.W. 1164, 1912 Tex. App. LEXIS 529, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/martin-v-irvin-texapp-1912.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack