Case ID: sw2d_2/html/0281-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PANNILL, C. J.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

SCOTT v. DANIEL et al.
    (No. 397.)
    Court of Civil Appeals of Texas. Eastland.
    Jan. 20, 1928,
    Appeal and error €=3387(3)— Filing of appeal bond over 20 days after expiration of court term authorized to continue for six weeks was too late (Acts 40th Leg. [1927] c. 32).
    Where term of court authorized by Acts 40th Leg. (1927) e. 32, to continue in session for six weeks could not continue longer than May 28, 1927, on which date it was adjourned, filing of appeal bond on June 22 was too late, since if term at which case is tried cannot continue longer than eight weeks the appeal bond must be filed within 20 days after expiration of the term.
    Appeal from District Court, Jones County; • W. R. .Chapman, Judge.
    Action between W. A. Scott and A. M. Daniel and others. From the judgment, W. A. Scott appeals.
    Appeal dismissed.
    W. E. Lessing, of Abilene, for appellant.
    Brooks & Robinson, of Anson, and T. A. Bledsoe, of Abilene, for appellees.
   PANNILL, C. J.

This cause was tried in the district court of Jones county and at a term thereof that by law may continue in session six weéks. ' Acts Fortieth Legislature, chapter 32, page 44.

Judgment was rendered on May 12, 1927. Motion for new trial was made and overruled May 26, 1927. The term could not continue longer than May 28, 1927, and it was adjourned on that date. The appeal bond was filed June 22, 1927. This was too late. Where the term cannot continue longer than eight weeks, the appeal bond must be filed within 20 days áfte'r the expiration of the term. Webster v. Lucas (Tex. Sup.) 296 S. W. 1089.

The appeal is therefore dismissed..