Legal Opinion

Heney v. Davidson

Texas Supreme Court

Decided November 12, 1930No. Motion No. 9222PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtJustice Greenwood

The defendant in error moves the court to dismiss the application for writ of error herein because the plaintiffs in error failed to deposit a copy of their application with the Clerk of the Court of Civil Appeals, and failed to notify defendant in error’s attorney of the deposit of such copy.

The' motion is grounded on the proposition that the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court does not attach until Article 1881 of the Revised Statutes, requiring the deposit of a copy of each application and notice thereof to adverse counsel, has been complied with.

When the question was first presented, the…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Pearson v. WestTexas Supreme Court · 1904
  2. Hanover Fire Insurance v. Shrader & RogersTexas Supreme Court · 1895
  3. Schleicher v. RungeTexas Supreme Court · 1897
  4. Long v. MartinTexas Supreme Court · 1923
  5. Vinson v. W. T. Carter & Bros.Texas Supreme Court · 1914

2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. State of Texas v. Ragland Clinic-HospitalTexas Supreme Court · 1942
  2. Graham v. Universal Credit Co.Court of Appeals of Texas · 1933
  3. Givens v. WoodwardTexas Supreme Court · 1948

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API