Case ID: sw2d_128/html/1137-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PER CURIAM.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

BRIGHT v. WIELAND et ux.
    No. 24231.
    Supreme Court of Texas.
    June 7, 1939.
    For opinion of Court of Civil Appeals, see 127 S.W.2d 372.
    Isaacks & Lattner, of El Paso, for plaintiff in error.
    Harrison, Rasberry & Lipscomb, of El Paso, for defendants in error.
   PER CURIAM.

The application for writ of error is refused. In entering this order we approve the decision of the Court of Civil Appeals that the evidence shows a- consideration for the substitute contract, but we do not approve the action of the Court of Civil Appeals in reversing the trial court’s judgment and rendering judgment in favor of th.e appellees in that Court. There being no appeal by appellees and no cross-assignments being filed by them, the judgment of the Court of Civil Appeals, on the appeal by appellant, should have been one of .affirmance and not of reversal and rendition in favor of appellees. The application for writ of error, however, contains no assignment presenting this question.