Court Opinion

ID: 9830974
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-09-01 20:40:20.883156+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:43:28.918309
License: Public Domain

On Motion for Rehearing on Order of Court Refusing Affirmance on Certificate.
In their motion for rehearing defendants in error call our attention to an error made in copying the notation made by the district clerk when the bond was presented to her. That notation reads: “ ‘The foregoing bond received the 7th day of January, 1937, and filed as of that date, but said bond is neither approved nor disapproved pending requested information in regard to the worth of the sureties/ (See certificate of the trial clerk upon the certificate filed as a part of the motion to affirm on certificate.)” Defendants in error insist that the provisions of article 1839 (as amended [Vernon’s Ann.Civ.St. art. 1839]) control. Articles 1839 and 2267 must be construed together. No citation could issue until the bond was approved. Consequently the waiver could not .function as a substitute for a citation until the conditions had been complied with that would authorize the issuance of citation. Houston & T. C. R. Co. v. Smith (Tex.Civ.App.) 97 S.W. 519.
As pertinent, see also Borger v. Morrow, 125 Tex. 321, 82 S.W.2d 944.
The motion for rehearing is overruled.