Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

23 Tex. 604

Crunk v. Crunk

Texas Supreme Court

Decided July 1, 1859

Texas Supreme Court · decided 1859-07-01

Error from Harrison. Tried below before the Hon. W. W. Morris. Motion by the plaintiffs in error to continue the case; and that citations issue to those defendants in error, not served with the process issued from the District Court.

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1859-07-01

How this case has been cited

Cited by 7 later decisions — most recently May 1940

7 state decisions

301859186018701880189019001910192019301940decided

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

Roberts, J.

¶1This case seems to have been brought into this court, before service on all of the defendants in error, under the apprehension, that the remedy by writ of error would be barred by further delay. Motion is made to perfect service, by a citation from this court, to be served on the defendants not served with the citation which issued from the District Court.

¶2The case of Spann et al. v. French, 13 Texas Rep. 91, is cited as authority for such proceeding. That case was overruled by the case of Chambers v. Shaw, 16 Texas Rep. 143, wherein it is held, that the citation in error, issued by the District Court, must be served, before the cause can be properly brought into this court. This has been the general practice, founded on the statute, directing that course to be pursued. (Hart. Dig., Art. 2937.)

¶3As to the writ of error being barred, our statute provides, that no writ of error shall be granted after two years from the rendition of final judgment. (Hart. Dig., Art. 2385.) In practice, the writ of error does not issue at all. The point of time at which it would properly be issued, if issued at all, would be, upon filing the petition and bond. That, then, may appropriately be taken as the time when the writ is granted, whether it be formally issued or not; and if that be within the two years, the remedy is not barred; but the party may proceed, even after the two years, to have the citation served on the defendants.

¶4The citation in error not having been served on all of the defendants, the case must be stricken from the docket.

¶5Dismissed.

/23/tex/604 · .json · Public domain