Baker v. Pierce
Court of Appeals of Texas
1Opinion of the CourtLevy, J.
(after stating the facts as above).
Error is predicated upon the ruling of the court refusing to grant the appellant’s request to open and conclude in adducing the evidence and in argument of the case. The court refused the request upon the ground, as stated in the bill of exception, that “the motion was not timely under rule 31.” Under rule 31 (142 S. W. xiii), governing the practice in the district and county courts, the defendant is required, in order to establish for himself the right to open and conlude in adducing the evidence and in argument, to file and present to the court the…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Smith v. Traders National BankTexas Supreme Court · 1889
- Pierce v. BakerCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1922
- Duke v. WalterCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1921
3Cited by5 opinions
- Baker v. PierceTexas Commission of Appeals · 1924
- Southern Surety Co. v. Hidalgo CountyTexas Supreme Court · 1935
- Price v. SeigerCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1930
- Lowe v. MastersonCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1936
- Reyna v. GonzalesCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1925