Bailey v. Clark, 16807
| Decision Date | 10 October 1966 |
| Docket Number | No. 16807,16807 |
| Citation | 407 S.W.2d 520 |
| Parties | Charles BAILEY, Appellant, v. Raymond CLARK, Appellee. . Fort Worth |
| Court | Texas Court of Appeals |
L. J. Varnell, Jr., Mineral Wells, for appellant.
Morgan, Gambill & Owen and Cecil A. Morgan, Fort Worth, for appellee.
In a primary election contest Raymond Clark was adjudged to be the Democratic nominee for the office of County Commissioner, Precinct No. 2 of Parker County.
The contestor, Charles Bailey, appealed.
Appellee Clark filed a motion praying for dismissal of the appeal for the reason the appellant did not timely give notice of appeal and file an appeal bond in compliance with Article 13.30 of V.A.C.S., Election Code.
More than five days had elapsed before appellant gave notice of appeal and filed an appeal bond.
Compliance with the statute (Article 13.30) is necessary to give this court jurisdiction.
Appellee's motion is granted and the appeal is hereby dismissed.
Dismissed.
I am not satisfied of the propriety of dismissal of the appeal on the ground stated in the opinion.
However, since absentee voting will begin October 19, 1966, it is obvious that the time within which the appeal could be considered is insufficient for a final determination on the merits. In view thereof it is my opinion that the appeal should be dismissed as moot .
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Flores v. Villarreal
...ELEC. CODE ANN. § 232.014(b). Citing Stevens v. McClure, 732 S.W.2d 115, 117 (Tex. App.—Amarillo 1987, no writ) and Bailey v. Clark, 407 S.W.2d 520, 521 (Tex. App.—Fort Worth 1966, no writ), Villarreal argues that a bond is required to perfect an appeal of a primary election contest. We dis......
-
In re D.B.
...deadline, not the deadline in the rules of appellate procedure, is necessary to give the appellate court jurisdiction. See Bailey v. Clark, 407 S.W.2d 520, 521 (Tex.Civ.App. — Fort Worth 1966, no writ) (applying five-day deadline in predecessor of section 232.014(b) of election code providi......
-
Rodriguez v. Thompson
...427 S.W.2d 958 (Tex.Civ.App. Waco 1968, writ ref'd n.r.e.). In view of the entry of the second judgment, we conclude that Bailey v. Clark, 407 S.W.2d 520 (Tex.Civ.App. Fort Woth 1966, no writ), is not controlling. The motion to dismiss is The Appellant initially contends that the trial Cour......
-
Arismendez v. Vasquez
...at *1 (Tex. App.—San Antonio 2010, no pet.) (mem. op.); In re D.B., 80 S.W.3d 698, 702, (Tex. App.—Dallas 2002, no pet.); see Bailey v. Clark, 407 S.W.2d 520, 521 (Tex. App.—Fort Worth 1966, no writ) (applying statutory five-day deadline for perfecting appeal in matter involving predecessor......