Case Name: CITY OF ORANGE et al. v. PLANT et ux.
Court: Texas Courts of Civil Appeals
Jurisdiction: Texas
Decision Date: 1919-01-15
Citations: 208 S.W. 238
Docket Number: No. 385
Parties: CITY OF ORANGE et al. v. PLANT et ux.
Judges: 
Reporter: South Western Reporter
Volume: 208
Pages: 238–238

Head Matter:
CITY OF ORANGE et al. v. PLANT et ux.
(No. 385.)
(Court of Civil Appeals of Texas. Beaumont.
Jan. 15, 1919.)
Appeal and Error <§==>773(4) — Review-Scope — Failure to File Beiep.
Where appellants have filed no brief, the court is not required to search the record for the errors assigned in appellants’ motion for new trial, and, upon consideration of appellees’ brief and finding that the judgment is authorized by the pleadings, the case must be affirmed.-
Appeal from District Court, Orange County; W. T. Davis, Judge.
Suit by J. F. Plant and wife against the City of Orange and others. Judgment for plaintiffs, and defendants appeal.
Affirmed.
J. B. Bisland, of Orange, for appellants.
Holland & Holland, of Orange, for appel-lees.

Opinion:
WALKER, J.
This is an appeal from a judgment of the district court of Orange county, in which the plaintiffs below recovered judgment against the city of Orange for the sum of $5,000. The appellant has filed no brief in this case, though it has been briefed by appellees.
We have carefully considered appellees' brief, and find no error. We are not required to search the record for the errors assigned in appellants' motion for new trial; and, finding that the judgment is one authorized under the pleadings of the plaintiff, the case is affirmed.