Ward v. Ward
Texas Supreme Court
Appeals from Austin and Marion. There is no occasion to state the facts of these cases. De Forrest v. Miller is the case designated as No. 1287 in the opinion. The only brief which has reached the reporter is that of—
1Opinion of the CourtWalker, J.
These eases are both appealed to this court from what are considered interlocutory judgments.
In Ho. 1364 the appellant moves to dismiss the appeal, for the reason that it was not perfected in time to be returnable to the present term of the court.
We have no doubt of the right of the appellant to dismiss the appeal, and we claim no right to adjudicate the case; but , we here acknowledge ourselves under obligation to the attorney for appellee for the very able brief filed in the case, and we shall consider the question presented in Ho. 1287, hoping that our opinion may govern this and all…
2Cited by13 opinions
- People ex rel. Hoyne v. SweitzerIllinois Supreme Court · 1915
- Hilburn v. St. Paul, M. & M. Railway Co.Montana Supreme Court · 1899
- Midwest Hotel Co. v. State Board of EqualizationWyoming Supreme Court · 1929
- Williams v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1894
- In re HendricksSupreme Court of Kansas · 1899
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.