Legal Opinion

Appel v. Childress

Court of Appeals of Texas

Decided February 10, 1909PublishedCited by 28 opinions

Appeal from the District Court of Medina County. Tried below before Hon. R. H. Burney.

1Opinion of the Court

JAMES, Chief Justice.

The judgment was that plaintiffs (appellants) do not recover the land sued for; that defendants S. P. Childress and H. G. Wilson go hence without day and recover costs, and that the warrantors of defendants (naming them) go hence without day and recover their costs, etc.

The appeal bond is payable to Childress and Wilson only. The warrantors were parties defendant (Sayles’ Rev. Stats., article 5252), were interested adversely to plaintiffs and have rights under the judgment that would be affected by the appeal. The bond should have been made payable to them also.

Instead of…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Dunn v. TaylorTexas Supreme Court · 1908
  2. Dulin v. MooreTexas Supreme Court · 1902
  3. Belt v. CettiTexas Supreme Court · 1906
  4. Wiess v. GoodhueTexas Supreme Court · 1904
  5. Waller v. LeonardTexas Supreme Court · 1896

3Cited by28 opinions

  1. Grogan Manufacturing Co. v. LaneTexas Supreme Court · 1943
  2. Mitchell v. HancockCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1917
  3. Hardy v. BumpsteadTexas Commission of Appeals · 1931
  4. Munger v. MungerCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1927
  5. Speckels v. KneipCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1942

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

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

Powered by the Exa API