Case ID: sw_271/html/0246-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "\n      HIGGINS, I.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

CHICAGO MERCANTILE CO. v. KENNON et ux.
    (No. 1719.)
    (Court of Civil Appeals of Texas. El Paso.
    March 5, 1925.
    On the Merits, March 26, 1925.)
    Appeal and error &wkey;>635(2) — Appeal dismissed, where record does not show that notice of appeal was given in trial court.
    Where record fails to disclose that notice of appeal was given in trial court, the appeal will be dismissed; such notice being jurisdictional in view of Rev. St. art. 2084.
    <@=»For other oases see same topic and KEY-NUMBER in all Key-Numbered Digests and Indexes
    Appeal from Eastland County Court; J. H. Jones, Judge.
    Action between the Chicago Mercantile Company and R. W. H. Kennon and wife. From a judgment for the latter, the former appeals.
    Affirmed.
    Patterson & Sherry, of Cisco, for appellant.
    D. K. Scott, of Cisco, for appellees.
   HIGGINS, I.

In this appeal the record fails to disclose that notice of appeal was given in the court below. This is a jurisdictional matter. Article 2084, R. S.

This appeal will be and it is ordered dismissed unless within 20 days from this date satisfactory evidence be adduced showing that in fact due notice was given as by law required. Telegraph Co. v. O’Keefe, 87 Tex. 423, 28 S. W. 945; Luse v. Parmer (Tex. Civ. App.) 221 S. W. 1031.

Dismissed conditionally.

On the Merits.

Satisfactory evidence having been presented that notice of appeal was in fact given in the court below as by law required, the order of dismissal heretofore made is set aside.

The trial was without a jury. Findings and conclusions were not filed in the court below. The only question presented by the appeal is the sufficiency of the evidence to support the judgment. Upon an examination of the evidenée, we are of the opinion it is sufficient to support the same.

The assignments of error are therefore overruled, and the judgment affirmed.