Legal Opinion
Luse v. Parmer
Court of Appeals of Texas
Decided March 4, 1920No. 1085PublishedCited by 29 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtHiggins, J.
In this appeal the record fails to disclose that notice of appeal was given in the court below. This is a jurisdictional matter. Article 2084, R. S.
This appeal will be, and it is, ordered dismissed, unless within 20 days from this date satisfactory evidence be adduced showing that in fact due notice was given as by law required. Tel. Co. v. O’Keefe, 87 Tex. 423, 28 S. W. 945.
Dismissed conditionally.
On Vacation of Order of Dismissal.
Satisfactory evidence having been adduced showing that in fact due notice of appeal was given in the court below as by law required, the order of dismissal…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Sult v. A. Hochstetter Oil Co.West Virginia Supreme Court · 1908
- Western Union Telegraph Co. v. O'KeefeTexas Supreme Court · 1894
- Luse v. BoatmanCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1919
- Farnsworth v. BarretCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1912
- Kiser v. McLeanWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1910
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by29 opinions
- Humphreys-Mexia Co. v. GammonTexas Supreme Court · 1923
- Anderson & Kerr Drilling Co. v. BruhlmeyerTexas Supreme Court · 1940
- Associated Oil Co. v. HartTexas Commission of Appeals · 1925
- Southland Royalty Co. v. Pan American Petroleum Corp.Texas Supreme Court · 1964
- Taylor v. Higgins Oil & Fuel Co.Court of Appeals of Texas · 1928
24 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.