Yandle v. Mundy
This text of 22 S.W.2d 983 (Yandle v. Mundy) 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.
Opinion
Appellant’s brief does not ■contain copy of any assignment or assignments of error filed by appellant in the court below, if any were filed there, nor any references to the transcript by which such assignments may be located in the record, as plainly required in rule 32. Appellant’s brief must therefore be disregarded, and, as no fundamental error is apparent in the record, the judgment appealed from must be affirmed. John P. Forrest v. Mrs. N. M. Moore et al., 22 S.W.(2d)-, decided by this'court on December 18, 1929; Ruth v. Cobe (Tex. Civ. App.) 165 S. W. 530; Dees v. Thompson (Tex. Civ. App.) 166 S. W. 56; Bradshaw v. Kearby (Tex. Civ. App.) 168 S. W. 436; Coons v. Lain (Tex. Civ. App.) 168 S. W. 981; Norton v. Lea (Tex. Civ. App.) 170 S. W. 267; Watson v. Patrick (Tex. Civ. App.) 174 S. W. 632; Arnold v. Fuller (Tex. Civ. App.) 279 S. W. 928; Citizens’ State Bank v. McMurrey (Tex. Civ. App.) 16 S.W.(2d) 541.
Affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
22 S.W.2d 983, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/yandle-v-mundy-texapp-1929.