Wimberly v. Cox

Court of Appeals of Texas

Wimberly v. Cox

30 S.W.2d 406, 1930 Tex. App. LEXIS 702

CourtCourt of Appeals of Texas

DecidedJuly 3, 1930

DocketNo. 2460.

StatusPublished

This text of 30 S.W.2d 406 (Wimberly v. Cox) 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

Wimberly v. Cox, 30 S.W.2d 406, 1930 Tex. App. LEXIS 702 (Tex. Ct. App. 1930).

Pincite

Opinion

PELPHREY, C. J.

This suit was brought by appellee in the justice court of precinct No. 1 of Crane county, to recover the sum of $130 alleged to be due from appellants for commissions on a contract for the drilling of a well for Crane common school district No. 1, and rent on a tractor for the same job.

Upon a' trial, judgment was rendered in favor of appellee and against Elkins for $130.

An appeal was perfected to the county court of Crane county; appellant Wimberly filed his answer, in which he excepted to the pleading of appellee on the ground that it stated two separate and distinct causes of, action. Upon the court’s sustaining the exception, ap-pellee dismissed as to the $30 upon account and proceeded to trial upon the written obligation in the amount of $100.

Appellee has now filed a motion to dismiss this appeal, on' the ground that it appears from the record that neither the judgment nor the amount in, controversy in the court below exceeds the sum of $100.

We think this motion is well taken and must be sustained. The jurisdiction of this court is limited by the Constitution and the statutes to cases appealed from a county court to those in which the judgment or amount in controversy exceeds the sum of $100 exclusive of interest and costs. Constitution, art. 5, §§ 6 and 16; article 1819, Complete Texas Statutes 1928. See, also, American Nat. Ins. Co. v. Murillo (Tex. Civ. App.) 11 S.W. (2d) 849; Railway Co. v. Wilson (Tex. Civ. App.) 17 S.W.(2d) 841.

The appeal is* dismissed.

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

PELPHREY, C. J.

This suit was brought by appellee in the justice court of precinct No. 1 of Crane county, to recover the sum of $130 alleged to be due from appellants for commissions on a contract for the drilling of a well for Crane common school district No. 1, and rent on a tractor for the same job.

Upon a' trial, judgment was rendered in favor of appellee and against Elkins for $130.

An appeal was perfected to the county court of Crane county; appellant Wimberly filed his answer, in which he excepted to the pleading of appellee on the ground that it stated two separate and distinct causes of, action. Upon the court’s sustaining the exception, ap-pellee dismissed as to the $30 upon account and proceeded to trial upon the written obligation in the amount of $100.

Appellee has now filed a motion to dismiss this appeal, on' the ground that it appears from the record that neither the judgment nor the amount in, controversy in the court below exceeds the sum of $100.

We think this motion is well taken and must be sustained. The jurisdiction of this court is limited by the Constitution and the statutes to cases appealed from a county court to those in which the judgment or amount in controversy exceeds the sum of $100 exclusive of interest and costs. Constitution, art. 5, §§ 6 and 16; article 1819, Complete Texas Statutes 1928. See, also, American Nat. Ins. Co. v. Murillo (Tex. Civ. App.) 11 S.W. (2d) 849; Railway Co. v. Wilson (Tex. Civ. App.) 17 S.W.(2d) 841.

The appeal is* dismissed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

30 S.W.2d 406, 1930 Tex. App. LEXIS 702, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/wimberly-v-cox-texapp-1930.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack