Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

165 S.W. 896

James v. Golson

Court of Appeals of Texas

Decided April 9, 1914

Court of Appeals of Texas · decided 1914-04-09

Appeal^ from District Court, Culberson County; Dan M. Jackson, Judge. Action between Myrtle B. James and another and B. A. Golson. Prom an adverse judgment, the first-named parties appeal.

Cited by 3 later decisions — most recently October 1926

3 state decisions

Relies on 57 Tex. Civ. App. 257 - Gainesville Water Co. v. City of Gainesville · 52 Tex. Civ. App. 425 - Nash v. Noble · 57 Tex. Civ. App. 460 - Gulf, Colorado & Santa Fe Railway Co. v. City of Belton

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Appeal dismissed · Decided 1914-04-09

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

HARPER,. C. J.

¶1 The term of the court at which the judgment was rendered from which this appeal is prosecuted adjourned on the 10th day of July, 1913. The appeal bond was filed on the 5th day of August, 1913. The bond not having been filed within 20 days after the adjournment of the trial court, as required by the statute, this court has no jurisdiction to hear and determine the case, and the appeal must be dismissed. Article 2084, Rev. Civ. Stat. 1911.

¶2 The record discloses .that the appellant is a nonresident of the county in which the judgment appealed from was rendered, but, under the statute above referred to, such nonresident did not have 30 days after the notice of appeal within which to file his appeal bond, because there is nothing in the record to show that the term of court at which the judgment was rendered could have continued in session for more than eight weeks, in which latter case only does the appellant have 30 days after notice of appeal is given in which to file his appeal bond. Nash v. Noble, 52 Tex. Civ. App. 425, 114 S. W. 848; Simpson v. Baker, 57 Tex. Civ. App. 460, 122 S. W. 959. Por ‘the reasons given the cause is dismissed.

¶3 Dismissed.

/165/sw/896 · .json · Public domain