Legal Opinion
United States v. Rose
Court of Appeals of Texas
Decided February 2, 1933No. 2762PublishedCited by 5 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
HIGGINS, Justice.
The United States of America prosecutes this writ of error from a judgment of the district court of Dallas county.
The cost bond upon the writ of error is in due form. The plaintiff in error’s signature to the bond was affixed “By A. M. Mood, Assistant United States District Attorney.”
Defendant in error moves to dismiss for want of a sufficient bond; the ground of the motion being that there is no act of Congress granting authority to an assistant United States district attorney to execute such a bond and thereby bind the United States on the same. It has been often held that…
2Cases cited24 opinions
- Singleton v. CheekSupreme Court of the United States · 1932
- Randon v. BartonTexas Supreme Court · 1849
- Johnson v. BlountTexas Supreme Court · 1877
- Battaglia v. BattagliaCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1926
- In Re Estate of StoneSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1922
19 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- Baird v. MillsCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1938
- Sloan v. Sloan's Adm'rCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1938
- Succession of JonesSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1936
- Doniphan Oil & Gas Co. v. LewisCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1936
- Baird v. MillsCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1938