Case ID: sw_152/html/1195-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "HODGES, J.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

HOLLAND v. BROWN & McFARLAND.
    (Court of Civil Appeals of Texas. Texarkana.
    Sept. 11, 1912.
    Rehearing Denied Oct. 17, 1912.)
    Appeal and Error (§ 1127) — Affirmance ' on Certificate — Time for Motion.
    A motion to affirm on certificate under Rev. St. 1895, art. 1016, must be made at the term to which the appeal is made returnable.
    [Ed. Note. — For other cases, see Appeal and Error, Cent. Dig. §§ 4482-4440; Dec. Dig. § 1127.]
    Appeal from Smith County Court; Jesse F. Odom, Judge.
    Action by Mrs. C. E. Holland against Brown & McFarland. From a judgment for defendant, plaintiff appeals. Motion to affirm on certificate.
    Refused.
    Lasseter & Mcllwaine, of Tyler, for appellant. Fitzgerald, Butler & Bulloch, of Tyler, for appellee.
    
      
      For other cases see same topic and section NUMBER in Dec. Dig. & Am. Dig. Key-No. Series & Rep’r Indexes
    
   HODGES, J.

This is a motion to affirm on certificate under the provisions of article 1016 of the Revised Civil Statutes of 1895. The certificate of the clerk shows that the appeal bond was filed in the court below on January 29, 1912. The motion to affirm, together with the certificate of the clerk, was filed with the clerk of this court September 11, 1912. The appeal, which was perfected in the court helow, was returnable to the last term of this court, which expired on the first Monday in July. The motion to affirm therefore comes too late. The following authorities sufficiently state the grounds: Laughlin v. Dabney, 86 Tex. 120, 24 S. W. 259; Western Union Tel. Co. v. Wofford, 32 Tex. Cr. R. 427, 72 S. W. 620, 74 S. W. 943; Pickett v. Mead, 25 S. W. 654; Berry v. Blankenship, 30 Tex. 380.

The motion to affirm is refused.