Case Name: G. M. & J. W. MAGILL v. GOSHORN
Court: Texas Courts of Civil Appeals
Jurisdiction: Texas
Decision Date: 1913-01-08
Citations: 153 S.W. 185
Docket Number: 
Parties: G. M. & J. W. MAGILL v. GOSHORN.
Judges: 
Reporter: South Western Reporter
Volume: 153
Pages: 185–185

Head Matter:
G. M. & J. W. MAGILL v. GOSHORN.
(Court of Civil Appeals of Texas. San Antonio.
Jan. 8, 1913.
Rehearing Denied Feb. 5, 1913.)
Costs (§ 260 ) — ■Appeal for Delay — Allowance op Damages.
The appellee was entitled to an allowance of 10 per cent, damages, where there was no merit in appellant’s defense, and it appeared that the appeal was taken merely for delay.
[Ed. Note. — Eor other cases, see Costs, Cent. Dig. §§ 983-996, 1002, 1003; Dec. Dig. § 260. ]
Appeal from District Court, Matagorda County; Wells Thompson, Judge.
Action by Mary Goshorn against G. M. and J. W. Magill. From judgment for plaintiff, defendants appeal.
Affirmed.
Gaines & Corbett, of Bay City, for appellants. Linn, Conger & Austin, of Bay City, for appellee.
For other cases see same topic and section NUMBER in Dec. Dig. & Am. Dig. Key-No. Series & Rep’r Indexes
Writ of error denied by Supreme Court.

Opinion:
TALIAFERRO, J.
This ease is identical in all things, except parties plaintiff and amount involved, with the case of G. M. & J. W. Magill v. Sadie A. Young, 153 S. W. 184, decided to-day by this court, and for the reasons assigned in that case this cause will b'e affirmed. The appellant has filed a motion suggesting delay and asking for 10 per cent, damages. The motion is granted. There was no merit in the defense, and it seems clear to us that this appeal is taken merely for delay. The judgment of the court is affirmed, with 10 per cent, damages.