Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

1 White & W. 24

Gibson v. Schoolcraft

Court of Appeals of Texas

Decided May 21, 1877

Court of Appeals of Texas · decided 1877-05-21

<p>Appeal from Palo Pinto County.</p>

Relies on Rio Grande Railroad v. Scanlan · Davenport v. Hervey · McClelland v. Shelby County

Decided 1877-05-21

¶1Opinion by

White, J.

¶2§ 49. Bills of exceptions; statement of facts; assignment of errors. In this case there is no assignment of errors, no bills of exceptions, and the paper purporting *25to be a statement of facts is not approved or certified by the judge, and therefore cannot be treated as a statement of facts. [Pas. Dig. arts. 1391 and 1490; Rules of Supreme Ct. No. 22; 32 Tex. 18; 25 Tex. 350; Murchison v. Holley, 40 Tex. 439.] In the absence of an assignment of errors, only such errors can be considered as go to the foundation of the action. [44 Tex. 649.]

May 21, 1877.

¶3§ 50. Assignment of errors, necessity for. The statute upon this subject is mandatory and emphatic, and was evidently intended as well to enable this court to make a proper disposition of the cases brought before it as for the protection of appellees and defendants in error. We do not, therefore, regard the mere submission of a case by the parties on briefs as obviating an observance of this plain requirement of law. [Davenport v. Hervey, 30 Tex. 309.]

¶4Affirmed.

/1/whitew/24 · .json · Public domain