Shelton v. Jarrell

Court of Appeals of Texas

Shelton v. Jarrell

63 S.W.2d 1091

CourtCourt of Appeals of Texas

DecidedOctober 7, 1933

DocketNo. 12661

StatusPublished

This text of 63 S.W.2d 1091 (Shelton v. Jarrell) 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

Shelton v. Jarrell, 63 S.W.2d 1091 (Tex. Ct. App. 1933).

Pincite

Opinion

LATTIMORE, Justice.

There are two appellees. The motion, which is also the affidavit, recited in part here pertinent: “Now comes the appellees ⅜ ⅜ * say that they and neither' of them are able to pay the costs of this appeal or any part thereof or to give security therefor.” It is signed “Milford and Jarrell, ap-pellees, by F. M. Milford.” And the jurat re[1092]*1092cites, as far as applicable: “Personally appeared E. M. Milford who says * * * that the facts therein stated are true and correct.”

Article 1866, R. S. (1925), provides: “If the party against whom the costs are adjudged shall make affidavit,” etc., and in this connection we read article 24, R. S. (1925), that any affidavit necessary or proper to be made by a party to a civil suit “may be made by either the party or his agent or attorney.”

All the parties securing issuance of the mandate without the payment of costs must make the affidavit. Hambleton v. Dignowity (Tex. Civ. App.) 213 S. W. 957. The vice of this affidavit is that no one attempts to say he is attempting to act as the agent of Jarrell. Milford swears that Jarrell is a pauper, but some one must act in the matter by Jarrell’s authority, and the record inust so inform us.

The .motion is overruled..

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

LATTIMORE, Justice.

There are two appellees. The motion, which is also the affidavit, recited in part here pertinent: “Now comes the appellees ⅜ ⅜ * say that they and neither' of them are able to pay the costs of this appeal or any part thereof or to give security therefor.” It is signed “Milford and Jarrell, ap-pellees, by F. M. Milford.” And the jurat re[1092]*1092cites, as far as applicable: “Personally appeared E. M. Milford who says * * * that the facts therein stated are true and correct.”

Article 1866, R. S. (1925), provides: “If the party against whom the costs are adjudged shall make affidavit,” etc., and in this connection we read article 24, R. S. (1925), that any affidavit necessary or proper to be made by a party to a civil suit “may be made by either the party or his agent or attorney.”

All the parties securing issuance of the mandate without the payment of costs must make the affidavit. Hambleton v. Dignowity (Tex. Civ. App.) 213 S. W. 957. The vice of this affidavit is that no one attempts to say he is attempting to act as the agent of Jarrell. Milford swears that Jarrell is a pauper, but some one must act in the matter by Jarrell’s authority, and the record inust so inform us.

The .motion is overruled..

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

63 S.W.2d 1091, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/shelton-v-jarrell-texapp-1933.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack