Court Opinion

ID: 9831236
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-09-01 20:57:22.027785+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:43:33.019823
License: Public Domain

On Motion to Dismiss.
COBBS, J.
Defendants in error move to dismiss this cause for want of jurisdiction on the ground that prior to the filing of the petition for writ of error the Legislature had passed chapter 18 of the General Laws of the Regular Session of the Thirty-Ninth Legislature, amending article 2078 of the Revised Civil Statutes of 1911, so as to omit the right to procure revision by means of writ of error, and which act had gone into effect 90 days after March 19, 1925, and was therefore in full force and effect prior to the filing of the petition and bond herein.
This contention cannot be sustained. A similar motion was made in the case of J. L. Chapman v. G. R. Morrison et al., 278 S. W. 236, opinion delivered December 9, 1925. The opinion was delivered by our Chief Justice, Fly. So convincing is that opinion that it was cited 'with approval and specially followed by the Amarillo Court of Civil Appeals in Globe Indemnity Co. v. E. O. Barnes, 280 S. W. 275. The opinion of that court was delivered on the 13th of January, 1926, by Justice Randolph. Justice Randolph refers to opinions of other Courts of Appeals, not seen by us, holding the same view and overruling all such motions. So these holdings preserve intact the right to bring up by writs of error such causes, as though the article had not been amended.
The motion to dismiss the writ of error for want of jurisdiction is therefore overruled.