Ryan Mortgage Investors v. Lehmann
Court of Appeals of Texas
1Opinion
On Motion for Rehearing
Plaintiffs’ counsel has now presented us with a lengthy motion for rehearing where*462in he includes eleven assignments of error. Such is the duty of an attorney at the bar; but, counsel has also included in this same instrument statements which coincide with those mentioned in Rust v. Rust, 88 S.W.2d 787, 794 (Tex.Civ.App.—Fort Worth 1935), modified, 131 Tex. 532, 117 S.W.2d 59 (1938). In so doing, it is apparent that counsel has failed to heed the admonitions of Honorable Garland F. Smith of the Wes-laco Bar as found in Appellate Procedure in Texas, § 19.10 (State Bar of…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Universal Metals & MacHinery, Inc. v. BohartTexas Supreme Court · 1976
- Santa Rosa Infirmary v. City of San AntonioTexas Supreme Court · 1924
- Micrea, Inc. v. Eureka Life Insurance Company of AmericaCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1976
- Hartnett v. Adams & Holmes Mortgage Co., Inc.Court of Appeals of Texas · 1976
- City of San Antonio v. Santa Rosa InfirmaryCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1923
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.