Court Opinion

ID: 9827552
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-09-01 17:39:25.576988+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:42:33.237683
License: Public Domain

On Motion for Rehearing and for Certiorari to Perfect the Record.
This cause was filed in this court on December 8, 1934, and was regularly reached and submitted on September 13, 1935 — nine months and five days after being filed.
Opposing counsel . very graciously agrees that we .may grant the ■ motion for certiorari and perfect the record, thereby permitting the filing'of a copy of Massachusetts. Bonding & Insurance Company’s answer and cross-action, but such a motion cannot be granted by us, after a cause is submitted and judgment rendered, even though all parties to the appeal consent to the motion and join in it.
Rule 22 expressly provides: “All parties will be expected, before submission, to see that the transcript of the record is properly prepared, and the mere failure to observe omissions or inaccuracies therein will not be admitted, after submission, as a reason for correcting the record or obtaining a rehearing.”
Appellate courts are confined to the record as presented, and it is manifestly the duty of all parties to .the record to see that it is both complete and that it speaks the truth. It is the duty of any party, who finds the record incomplete, to make a proper motion, to perfect the record, before the cause is submitted. The parties here had nine months to discover the defects before the cause was submitted. Ballard v. Breigh (Tex. Civ. App.) 262 S. W. 886, on rehearing page 891; Patrick v. Pierce, 107 Tex. 620, 183 S. W. 441.
The motion for certiorari is overruled, and the motion for rehearing is likewise overruled.