Wichita Valley Railway Com. v. Peery

30 S.W. 435, 87 Tex. 597
CourtTexas Supreme Court
DecidedMarch 21, 1895
DocketNo. 259.
StatusPublished
Cited by8 cases

This text of 30 S.W. 435 (Wichita Valley Railway Com. v. Peery) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Texas Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Wichita Valley Railway Com. v. Peery, 30 S.W. 435, 87 Tex. 597 (Tex. 1895).

Opinion

GAIRES, Chief Justice.

The appeal in this case was dismissed by the Court of Civil Appeals of its own motion, because the transcript failed to show that notice of appeal had been given in the trial court. Thereupon the appellant filed a motion for a rehearing and to set aside the order of dismissal, in which it was alleged, that the notice of appeal had in fact been given in open court, and had been entered upon the judge’s docket. The motion was supported by the affidavits of counsel, as well as by the certificate of the judge and that of the clerk of the court in which the case was tried. The motion was overruled. This was error. The Court of Civil Appeals should have set aside the *598 order of dismissal and granted a reasonable time to amend the minutes of the District Court and to perfect the record of their own court. Tel. Co. v. O’Keefe, decided at the present term (ante, p. 423).

Since the decision of the case cited, our attention has been called to the case of Cavanaugh v. Peterson, 47 Texas, 197, in which a similar ruling was made. The records of this court in that case show, that the appeal was dismissed because the transcript failed to disclose that notice of appeal had been given in the trial court; but that upon a motion alleging that the notice had in fact been given, supported by-evidence, a rehearing was granted, and time was allowed to enable the appellant to cause the minutes of the trial court to be amended, and the amendment to be certified as a part of the record. The opinion of the court upon the merits is reported in the volume above cited; but there is no report of the action of the court upon the motion.

The judgment of the Court of Civil Appeals is reversed, and the cause remanded to that court for proceedings in accordance with this opinion.

Reversed and remanded to Court of Civil Appeals.

Delivered March 18, 1895.

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

Related

Blalock v. Slocomb
245 S.W. 648 (Texas Commission of Appeals, 1922)
Perry v. Greer
223 S.W. 714 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1915)
Houston & Texas Central Railroad v. Parker
135 S.W. 369 (Texas Supreme Court, 1911)
Lefeyvre v. Jackson
135 S.W. 212 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1911)
Gulf States Brick Co. v. Beaumont Rice Mills Co.
128 S.W. 931 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1910)
Gilbough v. Stahl Building Co.
45 S.W. 385 (Texas Supreme Court, 1898)
Gulf, Colorado & Santa Fe Railway Co. v. Cannon
31 S.W. 498 (Texas Supreme Court, 1895)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
30 S.W. 435, 87 Tex. 597, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/wichita-valley-railway-com-v-peery-tex-1895.