Case Name: LINGO LUMBER CO. v. GARVIN et al.
Court: Texas Courts of Civil Appeals
Jurisdiction: Texas
Decision Date: 1915-11-20
Citations: 181 S.W. 561
Docket Number: No. 7424
Parties: LINGO LUMBER CO. v. GARVIN et al.
Judges: 
Reporter: South Western Reporter
Volume: 181
Pages: 561–562

Head Matter:
LINGO LUMBER CO. v. GARVIN et al.
(No. 7424.)
(Court of Civil Appeals of Texas. Dallas.
Nov. 20, 1915.
On Rehearing, Jan. 8, 1916.)
1. Appeal and Error <&wkey;548 — Review — Statement op Facts.
Assignments of error, relating to the action of the court, the correctness of which depended upon the evidence, cannot be reviewed without a statement of facts.
[Ed. Note. — For other cases, see Appeal and Error, Cent. Dig. §§ 2433-2440; Dec. Dig. <&wkey; 548.]
2. Appeal and Errori &wkey;s573 — Statement op Facts— Sufficiency.
Notwithstanding Rev. St. 1911, art. 1949, providing for the use of an agreed statement in the trial after being signed by the parties and certified to by the court as correct, such agreed statement cannot be considered as a statement of facts on appeal, where not approved by the trial judge; article 2068 requiring such approval.
[Ed. Note. — For other cases, see Appeal and Error, Cent. Dig. §§ 2560, 2562-2564, 2566; Dec. Dig. <S=>573.]
On Rehearing.
3. Appeal and Error &wkey;>553 — Review — Statement op Facts.
Under Rev. St. 1911, art. 2068, requiring that the facts shall be copied in one statement and that written instruments introduced in evidence by agreement shall not be stated or copied in detail into the statement of facts, but the facts thus established shall be stated as facts proven in the case, an agreed statement used by the parties below cannot be considered on appeal as a statement of facts, though approved by the trial judge; the various exhibits and instruments introduced being presented to the appellate court separately.
[Ed. Note. — For other cases, see Appeal and Error, Cent. Dig. §§ 2461, 2462, 2465-2471; Dec. Dig. &wkey;553.]
4. Courts &wkey;>78 — Rules op Court — Validity.
Rule 46 for the Court of Civil Appeals (142 5. W. xv), relating to statement of facts where the case was tried on agreed facts, is invalid in so far as it may conflict with the statutes.
[Ed. Note. — For other cases, see Courts, Cent. Dig. §§ 274, 276-281; Dec. Dig. &wkey;78.]
Appeal from District Court, Dallas County; T. F. Lewis, Special Judge.
Action by the Lingo Lumber Company against Fred C. Garvin and Royal Smith. From a judgment in favor of the last-named defendant, plaintiff appeals.
Affirmed.
Flippen, Gresham & Freeman and R. M. Frezevant, all of Dallas, for appellant. Read, Lowrance & Bates, of Dallas, for appellee.
Application for writ of error pending in .Supreme Court.

Opinion:
RAINEY, C. J.
Appellant brought this suit against appellees to recover $582 and also to foreclose a lien on the homestead of Royal Smith and wife, alleging that said amount was for lumber and material furnished for the erection of a residence. Fred Garvin-made default, and appellee Royal Smith answered and contested the allegations of appellant's petition as to the personal liability of Royal Smith, and the foreclosure of the lien. A trial resulted in a judgment for appellant against Fred C. Garvin, contractor, to whom the materials were furnished, and in favor of Smith personally, and against the enforcement of a lien on the building. From this judgment this appeal is prosecuted.
The assignments presented by appellant all relate to the action of the court, the correctness of which depends upon the evidence adduced upon the trial of the cause. As there is no proper statement of facts found in the record from which we can determine the matters involved, the assignments cannot be intelligibly considered. With the record we find what purports to be an agreed statement of facts, with exhibits attached, used by the attorneys in the trial of the case, but the same shows no ap proval or certificate oí tile trial judge that it is correct; therefore the same in that condition cannot be looked to or considered by us.
Article 1949, R. S. 1911, provides for the use of an agreed statement in the trial after being signed by the parties and certified to by the court as correct, and article 2068 requires statements of facts on appeal to also show the approval of the trial judge. As the statement of facts here presented does not show the approval of the trial judge, the same will not be entertained by this court.
The judgment is affirmed.
<§=>For other cases see same topic and KEY-NUMBER in all Kev-Numbered Digests and Indexes