Read v. Thomas

Court of Appeals of Texas

Read v. Thomas

100 S.W.2d 1025

CourtCourt of Appeals of Texas

DecidedDecember 11, 1936

DocketNo. 1606

StatusPublished

This text of 100 S.W.2d 1025 (Read v. Thomas) 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

Read v. Thomas, 100 S.W.2d 1025 (Tex. Ct. App. 1936).

Pincite

Opinion

LESLIE, Chief Justice.

This is a suit by H. Clay Read and wife against the defendants Clyde E. Thomas and others to cancel certain deeds and to adjudicate ownership and the right of possession to the property involved. Upon a trial in the lower court judgment was rendered that plaintiffs take nothing by their suit as against the defendants and that defendants, each and all, go hence without a day with their costs, etc. The plaintiffs appeal.

The case comes to this court upon a transcript of the record only. Neither party has filed any brief in this court. We have therefore examined the record in this case in order to determine whether there is ' fundamental error in the trial court’s judgment. Finding none, it is' the duty of this court to affirm the same, which is done upon the authority of Haynes v. J. M. Radford Groc. Co., 118 Tex. 277, 14 S.W.(2d) 811; Id., (Tex.Civ.App.) 16 S.W.(2d) 1118.

Further, Read and wife have filed no statement of facts in this court in an effort to establish any of the allegations and charges set up in the pleadings upon which they went to trial. For the reason first above set out and upon the authority cited, the judgment of the trial court is affirmed.

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

LESLIE, Chief Justice.

This is a suit by H. Clay Read and wife against the defendants Clyde E. Thomas and others to cancel certain deeds and to adjudicate ownership and the right of possession to the property involved. Upon a trial in the lower court judgment was rendered that plaintiffs take nothing by their suit as against the defendants and that defendants, each and all, go hence without a day with their costs, etc. The plaintiffs appeal.

The case comes to this court upon a transcript of the record only. Neither party has filed any brief in this court. We have therefore examined the record in this case in order to determine whether there is ' fundamental error in the trial court’s judgment. Finding none, it is' the duty of this court to affirm the same, which is done upon the authority of Haynes v. J. M. Radford Groc. Co., 118 Tex. 277, 14 S.W.(2d) 811; Id., (Tex.Civ.App.) 16 S.W.(2d) 1118.

Further, Read and wife have filed no statement of facts in this court in an effort to establish any of the allegations and charges set up in the pleadings upon which they went to trial. For the reason first above set out and upon the authority cited, the judgment of the trial court is affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

100 S.W.2d 1025, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/read-v-thomas-texapp-1936.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack