Legal Opinion

Greene Gold-Silver Co. v. Silbert

Court of Appeals of Texas

Decided June 26, 1913PublishedCited by 10 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtHiggins, J.

The assignments of error in this cause cannot be considered: First. Because they do not comply with that provision of rule 25 (142 S.r W. xii), which requires that they refer to that portion of the motion for a new trial in which the error is complained of. El Paso Electric Railway Co. v. Lee (on rehearing) 157 S. W. 748, and W. U. Tel. Co. v. Hill, 158 S. W. -, both cases recently decided by this court and not yet officially reported. Second. Because the propositions in the brief subjoined to the assignments are not supported by such statement as is necessary and sufficient to explain and…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Wooters v. International & G. N. R. R. Co.Texas Supreme Court · 1881
  2. El Paso Electric Ry. Co. v. LeeCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1913
  3. Durkee v. CotaCalifornia Supreme Court · 1887
  4. McCauley v. Long & Co.Texas Supreme Court · 1884
  5. Peck v. MorganCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1913

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

3Cited by10 opinions

  1. City of Houston v. Howe & WiseCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1959
  2. Glover v. Houston Belt & Terminal Ry. Co.Court of Appeals of Texas · 1914
  3. Waldon v. DavisCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1916
  4. Boyd v. Chicago, R. I. & P. Ry. Co.Court of Appeals of Texas · 1941
  5. Central Power & Light Co. v. HederCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1939

5 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