Waterman Lumber & Supply Co. v. Wheeler

Court of Appeals of Texas

Waterman Lumber & Supply Co. v. Wheeler

142 S.W. 145, 1911 Tex. App. LEXIS 43

CourtCourt of Appeals of Texas

DecidedNovember 9, 1911

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 142 S.W. 145 (Waterman Lumber & Supply Co. v. Wheeler) 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

Waterman Lumber & Supply Co. v. Wheeler, 142 S.W. 145, 1911 Tex. App. LEXIS 43 (Tex. Ct. App. 1911).

Pincite

Opinion

LEVY, .J.

A motion is filed in this court ,to. affirm on certificate a judgment rendered in the district court of Shelby county. The judgment was rendered on April 26, 1911, notice- of appeal was given May 27th, and appeal bond executed and filed on June 7th. The law placing Shelby county in the Sixth appellate district, however, was not in force at the time the appeal in this case was perfected. Acts 1911, p. 269. Consequently this particular court has no jurisdiction to entertain the appeal. See Gordon v. Daniels, 104 S. W. 786, and Gordon v. Willson, 101 Tex. 43, 104 S. W. 1043. As this court is without jurisdiction to entertain ' the - appeal, it follows" that it has not jurisdiction to entertain any proceeding to affirm on certificate, as provided 'by article 1016 of the Revised Civil Statutes of 1895.

The motion is dismissed for want of jurisdiction.

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

LEVY, .J.

A motion is filed in this court ,to. affirm on certificate a judgment rendered in the district court of Shelby county. The judgment was rendered on April 26, 1911, notice- of appeal was given May 27th, and appeal bond executed and filed on June 7th. The law placing Shelby county in the Sixth appellate district, however, was not in force at the time the appeal in this case was perfected. Acts 1911, p. 269. Consequently this particular court has no jurisdiction to entertain the appeal. See Gordon v. Daniels, 104 S. W. 786, and Gordon v. Willson, 101 Tex. 43, 104 S. W. 1043. As this court is without jurisdiction to entertain ' the - appeal, it follows" that it has not jurisdiction to entertain any proceeding to affirm on certificate, as provided 'by article 1016 of the Revised Civil Statutes of 1895.

The motion is dismissed for want of jurisdiction.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

142 S.W. 145, 1911 Tex. App. LEXIS 43, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/waterman-lumber-supply-co-v-wheeler-texapp-1911.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack