Court Opinion

ID: 9832410
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-09-01 21:53:37.884724+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:43:46.577403
License: Public Domain

On Motion for Rehearing.
On a former day of this term of court, we dismissed this appeal because the affidavit in lieu of appeal bond was not filed within twenty days after appellant’s motion for a new trial was overruled, as required by Article 2253, R.S.1925. In -his motion for rehearing, appellant says his motion for new trial was overruled on July 12, 1940, and that he filed his affidavit in lieu of appeal bond on August 2, 1940, and insists that this was within the required time, twenty days. It is obvious that appellant arrives at this conclusion by excluding both the day the motion for a new trial was overruled and the day that the affidavit in lieu of bond was filed. This he could not do. In judicial proceedings the general rule is that where any matter of practice or procedure is required by statute to be done within a certain number of days from or after a preceding event, the first day is excluded in computing sttch period of time and the last day of time given for performance of the thing to be done is counted. 62 C.J. (Time) §§ 39, 40, pages 992, 993. This is the law in Texas. Aetna Life Ins. Co. v. Wimberly, 102 Tex. 46, 112 S.W. 1038, 1039, 23 L.R.A.,N.S., 759, 132 Am.St.Rep. 852. Here according to appellant’s contention the motion for new trial was overruled on July 12, 1940— that left 19 days in July; the affidavit in lieu of bond was filed on August 2, 1940. Nineteen days in July and two in August make 21 days, one day too late under the statute requiring the appeal bond, or affidavit in lieu of bond to be filed within twenty days after the motion for new trial was overruled. The motion for rehearing is denied.