Burnett v. Powell
Court of Appeals of Texas
Appeal from Wichita. Tried below before Hon. J. A. Templeton. In this case the judgment of the District Court was affirmed on oral opinion, October 25, 1893. Appellant thereupon applied to the Supreme Court for a writ of error, and on January 11, 1894, obtained an order of that court allowing him thirty days within which to amend his application by obtaining and attaching thereto conclusions of fact and law by the Court of Civil Appeals.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Wichita. Tried below before Hon. J. A. Templeton. In this case the judgment of the District Court was affirmed on oral opinion, October 25, 1893. Appellant thereupon applied to the Supreme Court for a writ of error, and on January 11, 1894, obtained an order of that court allowing him thirty days within which to amend his application by obtaining and attaching thereto conclusions of fact and law by the Court of Civil Appeals. Burnett v. Powell, 24 S. W. Rep., 788. Appellant then filed in the Court of Civil Appeals a motion for written ■conclusions of fact and law; and the opinion…
1Opinion of the Court
HEAD, Associate Justice.
Believing that the legal literature of this State is already sufficiently voluminous, especially in prescribing rules for the correct solution of questions of boundary, this court, from its organization, has felt that it could subserve the interests of litigants better by devoting its time to the decision of cases than by writing at length the reasons for such decisions, unless some useful purpose could be accomplished thereby; and we have, therefore, adopted the practice of delivering our opinions orally in affirmed cases in which our jurisdiction is believed to be…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Von Rosenberg v. CuellarTexas Supreme Court · 1891
- Allen v. KoepselTexas Supreme Court · 1890
- Hogue v. WilliamsonTexas Supreme Court · 1893
- Koepsel v. AllenTexas Supreme Court · 1887
3Cited by1 opinion
- McDonald v. Humble Oil & Refining Co.Court of Appeals of Texas · 1935