Case Name: Choctaw, Oklahoma & Gulf Railway Company v. Otto Locke
Court: Texas Courts of Civil Appeals
Jurisdiction: Texas
Decision Date: 1905-02-01
Citations: 38 Tex. Civ. App. 191
Docket Number: 
Parties: Choctaw, Oklahoma & Gulf Railway Company v. Otto Locke.
Judges: 
Reporter: Texas Civil Appeals Reports
Volume: 38
Pages: 191–192

Head Matter:
Choctaw, Oklahoma & Gulf Railway Company v. Otto Locke.
Decided February 1, 1905.
Notice of Appeal—Amicus Curiae.
A notice of appeal can not be given for one appealing merely by an amicus curiae, and appeal taken thereon will be dismissed.
Appeal from the District Court of Comal County. Tried below before Hon. L. W. Moore.
N. H. Lassiter and Robert Harrison, for appellant.
F. J. Maier, for motion to dismiss,
cited: Rev. Stats., art. 1387; San Antonio & A. P. Ry. Co. v. McDonald, 31 S. W. Rep., 72; Estado Ld. & C. Co. v. Ansley, 6 Texas Civ. App., 185, 24 S. W. Rep., 933; Wesley v. Kuteman, 62 S. W. Rep., 1074.

Opinion:
FISHER, Chief Justice.
This is a suit by the appellee against the Southern Bailway Company, the St. Louis & Southwestern Bailway Company, the International & Great Northern Bailroad Company, the Texas Pacific Baihvay Company, Kansas City Southern Bailway Company and the Choctaw, Oklahoma & Gulf Bailway Company, to recover damages in the sum of $600.
The judgment shows that all of the defendants except the Choctaw, Oklahoma & Gulf Bailroad Company were dismissed from the case, and judgment by default in the sum of $435 was rendered against the Choctaw, Oklahoma & Gulf Bailroad Company, from which judgment this road appealed.
The notice of appeal was given by a party merely as amicus curiae. It does not appear that at the time he was the agent for the railway company, or in any wise connected with the same; nor does it appear that he was the attorney for that company; but the fact is indisputable that he was merely acting as amicus curiae in giving the notice of appeal-
A motion is made and filed in this court asking us to dismiss the appeal, because notice of appeal was not given by the railway company or any person authorized to act for it. It is unnecessary for us to undertake to state what is the authority of an amicus curiae, or what office or function he may perform in appearing before the court and offering such suggestions as he may see proper to make, as we are clearly of the opinion that he has no power to represent a party in, giving notice of appeal.
The motion is sustained and the appeal dismissed at the cost of the Choctaw, Oklahoma & Gulf Bailroad Company.
Appeal dismissed.