Case Name: SEARLE v. SAN ANTONIO HOTEL CO.
Court: Texas Court of Civil Appeals
Jurisdiction: Texas
Decision Date: 1922-10-25
Citations: 244 S.W. 571
Docket Number: No. 6802
Parties: SEARLE v. SAN ANTONIO HOTEL CO.
Judges: 
Reporter: South Western Reporter
Volume: 244
Pages: 571–571

Head Matter:
SEARLE v. SAN ANTONIO HOTEL CO.
(No. 6802.)
(Court of Civil Appeals of Texas. San Antonia.
Oct. 25, 1922.)
Appeal and error @=>773(2) — Appeal dismissed where rules for briefing not followed.
Where appeal was filed March 22, and appellant given timely notice of date for submission on October 18, and on October 14 a brief was filed in the appellate court, none having b.een filed in the court below, defendant’s motion to dismiss the appeal because of failure to follow the rules for briefing will be sustained.
Appeal from Bexar County Court; McCol-lum Burnett, Judge.
Action by O. P. Searle, executor, against the San Antonio Hotel Company. From a judgment for defendant, plaintiff appeals.
Appeal dismissed.
W. W. King, of San Antonio, for appellant.
Taliaferro, Cunningham & Woursund and W. B. Jack Ball, all of San Antonio, for ap-pellee.

Opinion:
FLY, C. J.
The record in this cause was filed in this court on March 22, 1922, and nearly seven months thereafter was set for submission on October 18, 1922, and appellant given due and timely notice of the date for such submission. On October 14, about four days before the date of submission, a brief was filed in this court, none having been filed in the court below. On October 17, 1922, a motion to dismiss the appeal was filed by appellee because of failure to follow rules for briefing.' No effort-was made by appellant to follow any of the rules as to briefs.
No excuse has been offered for a failure to file a brief in this court, and, there being an inexcusable disregard of the law and rules, and appellee having demanded the enforcement of the rules, the motion^ will be sustained.
The appeal is dismissed.