Case ID: tex-civ-app_35/html/0436-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "STEPHENS, Associate Justice.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

N. E. Booher v. H. C. Anderson et al.
    Decided April 9, 1904
    Practice on Appeal—Filing Briefs.
    Where appellant has failed to file brief in the appellate court and offers no excuse for his failure to file it in the court below twenty days before the day set for the submission of the case, his application for leave to file brief will be refused and the appeal dismissed. Following Harris v. Bryson, 31 Texas Civ. App., 514.
    Appeal from the District Court of Eastland. Tried below before Hon. J. H. Calhoun.
    
      J. R. Stubblefield, for appellant.
    
      Frost & Chartain, for appellees.
   STEPHENS, Associate Justice.

This appeal must be dismissed for want of prosecution; no brief having been filed for appellant in this court, and no excuse having b,een offered for his failure to file a brief in the court below at least twenty days before the day set for the submission of £he case, as will be seen from the following statement: The transcript was filed November 38, 1903, and an order was made March 13, 1904, setting down the appeal for submission on April 3, 1904. Not until March 31, 1904, which was less than twenty days before submission day, and even after a motion to dismiss the appeal had been made, did appellant file any brief in the District Court. In his application for leave to file brief in this court notwithstanding his failure to file brief in the District Court within the prescribed time, no excuse whatever was offered for the delay.

The ease comes clearly within the ruling made by the Court of Civil Appeals for the Third District in Harris v. Bryson, 31 Texas Civ. App., 514, in which writ of error was denied. The application for leave to file brief is therefore overruled, and the motion to dismiss appeal is sustained.

Dismissed.