Stewart v. Lenoir

72 S.W. 619, 31 Tex. Civ. App. 470, 1903 Tex. App. LEXIS 98
CourtCourt of Appeals of Texas
DecidedFebruary 25, 1903
StatusPublished
Cited by10 cases

This text of 72 S.W. 619 (Stewart v. Lenoir) 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
Stewart v. Lenoir, 72 S.W. 619, 31 Tex. Civ. App. 470, 1903 Tex. App. LEXIS 98 (Tex. Ct. App. 1903).

Opinion

KEY, Associate Justice.

Appellee brought this suit against Parazette Stewart and Jim Stewart. Upon trial a judgment was rendered in favor of the plaintiff against the defendant Parazette- Stewart, and she has appealed.

Though not adverted to by either party, the transcript presents a question of jurisdiction which this court must decide before it can reach the merits of the appeal.

As a general rule the appellate courts of this State have no jurisdiction until a final judgment has been rendered in the court below; and there is nothing to take this case out of the general rule. It is also well settled that a judgment which does not finally dispose of all the parties to the suit is not a final judgment. Batts’ Civ. Stats., art. 1383 ; Andrews v. Andrews, Dal., 427 ; Simpson v. Bennett, 42 Texas, 241 ; Martin v. Crow, 28 Texas, 615 ; Linn v. Arambould, 55 Texas, 611 ; Railway v. Smith, 58 Texas, 74 ; Mignon v. Brinson, 74 Texas, 18 ; Mills v. Paul, 1 Texas Civ. App., 419 ; same case, 4 Texas Civ. App., 504.

In this case the judgment recites the fact that the plaintiff and Parazette Stewart agreed to a continuance of the cause as to the defendant Jim Stewart, because citation had not been served on him; and the judgment declares that it was so ordered. By agreement of the same parties the case then proceeded to trial. But that agreement does not make the judgment that was rendered a final judgment. That judgment does not dispose of the case as against Jim Stewart, who was a party to the suit, and therefore it is not n final judgment; and not being a final judgment, no appeal can be prosecuted from it.

Hence we hold that this court has no jurisdiction, and that the appeal must be dismissed.

Dismissed.

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

Related

In Re Badgett
36 S.E.2d 658 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1946)
Community Natural Gas Co. v. Henley
11 S.W.2d 206 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1928)
Passapae v. Oehring
118 A. 130 (Court of Appeals of Maryland, 1922)
McAdoo v. McCoy
215 S.W. 870 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1919)
Lusk v. Bandy
1919 OK 132 (Supreme Court of Oklahoma, 1919)
Chafin v. Norfolk & Western Railway Co.
93 S.E. 822 (West Virginia Supreme Court, 1917)
Central Vermont Railway Co. v. White
238 U.S. 507 (Supreme Court, 1915)
Hillsman v. Cline
145 S.W. 726 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1912)
Holley v. Duke
96 S.W. 1090 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1906)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
72 S.W. 619, 31 Tex. Civ. App. 470, 1903 Tex. App. LEXIS 98, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/stewart-v-lenoir-texapp-1903.