Ennis v. Crump
Texas Supreme Court
Appeal from Austin. Motion to dismiss. The appellants, as administrators for George W. Reynolds, deceased, sued the appellee and another upon a promissory note made by the appellee and others, and indorsed to the plaintiffs as administrators of G. W. Reynolds, their intestate. There was a judgment for the defendant, and the plaintiffs appealed. No appeal-bond was given, and the appellee moved to dismiss the appeal for the want of a bond.
1Opinion of the CourtWheeler, J.
The question is, was it necessary for the appellants, being administrators, to have given an appeal-bond ? And we are of the opinion that it was not.
The act of 1840 (4 Stat., 129, see. 58) provided that i‘in all cases of appeal from any court in the Republic it shall not bo necessary for executors, administrators, or guardians to give the bond and security required of appellants in other cases.”
Under this statute it was considered the privilege of persons litigating in the capacity of executors, &c., to appeal without giving bond. (1 Tex. R., 190.)
*18The act of 1S4S, see. 4, which is a revision…
2Cited by16 opinions
- Lewis v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1910
- Palmer v. PalmerCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1992
- Adams v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1911
- Scott v. StateCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1894
- Bridges v. CundiffTexas Supreme Court · 1876
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.