Nail v. First National Bank of Chickasha

Court of Appeals of Texas

Nail v. First National Bank of Chickasha

118 S.W. 1084, 55 Tex. Civ. App. 455, 1909 Tex. App. LEXIS 372

DecidedApril 28, 1909

StatusPublished

This text of 118 S.W. 1084 (Nail v. First National Bank of Chickasha) 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

Nail v. First National Bank of Chickasha, 118 S.W. 1084, 55 Tex. Civ. App. 455, 1909 Tex. App. LEXIS 372 (Tex. Ct. App. 1909).

Pincite

Opinion

FISHER, Chief Justice.

We grant appellee’s motion to strike from the record the statement of facts therein copied, and we grant appellant’s motion to permit Mm to file the original statement ‘of facts. Appellant’s motion also contains an application for certiorari to bring up a more perfect record. From the statement contained in this motion it seems that the clerk failed to fasten the transcript at the top, as the rule prescribes, and failed to incorporate in it appellant’s assignments of errors. Appellant has accompanied the motion with an entirely new transcript or record, which is properly certified to, and which is properly prepared in accordance with the rules and which contains his assignments of errors, and asks that this transcript be filed in lieu of the original one which is defective and not complete as pointed out. We see no impropriety in granting this request, and the new transcript is ordered filed to take effect from the date of the filing of the one first returned to tMs court and here filed August 10, 1908.

The costs of both motions are taxed against the appellant.

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

FISHER, Chief Justice.

We grant appellee’s motion to strike from the record the statement of facts therein copied, and we grant appellant’s motion to permit Mm to file the original statement ‘of facts. Appellant’s motion also contains an application for certiorari to bring up a more perfect record. From the statement contained in this motion it seems that the clerk failed to fasten the transcript at the top, as the rule prescribes, and failed to incorporate in it appellant’s assignments of errors. Appellant has accompanied the motion with an entirely new transcript or record, which is properly certified to, and which is properly prepared in accordance with the rules and which contains his assignments of errors, and asks that this transcript be filed in lieu of the original one which is defective and not complete as pointed out. We see no impropriety in granting this request, and the new transcript is ordered filed to take effect from the date of the filing of the one first returned to tMs court and here filed August 10, 1908.

The costs of both motions are taxed against the appellant.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

118 S.W. 1084, 55 Tex. Civ. App. 455, 1909 Tex. App. LEXIS 372, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/nail-v-first-national-bank-of-chickasha-texapp-1909.