Thoms v. Eskew

81 S.W.2d 713
CourtCourt of Appeals of Texas
DecidedJanuary 30, 1935
DocketNo. 8286
StatusPublished
Cited by3 cases

This text of 81 S.W.2d 713 (Thoms v. Eskew) 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
Thoms v. Eskew, 81 S.W.2d 713 (Tex. Ct. App. 1935).

Opinion

McCLENDON, Chief Justice.

This is an appeal from an order of the trial judge sustaining a contest by the clerk of a pauper’s oath on appeal by writ of error filed by appellants under R. S., art 2266, as amended by chapter 134, § 1, p. 226, Acts 42d Leg. 1931 (Vernon’s Ann. Civ. St. art. 2266). Appeal will not lie from such order. Melancon v. First Nat. Bank (Tex. Civ. App.) 68 S.W.(2d) 538. Mandamus is the proper procedural remedy. Boone v. McBee (Tex. Civ. App.) 280 S. W. 295, and cases there cited.

If appellants desire to apply for mandamus, they may withdraw the record and statement of facts for use therein. Since, however, they have filed a $200 appeal bond in this proceeding, they must pay the costs in accordance with the obligation of said bond, as a condition precedent to- such withdrawal.

The appeal is dismissed.

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

Related

Florek v. Shaw
357 S.W.2d 769 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1962)
Burleson v. Rawlins
174 S.W.2d 979 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1943)
Van Benthuysen v. Gengler
100 S.W.2d 116 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1936)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
81 S.W.2d 713, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/thoms-v-eskew-texapp-1935.