Texas Bank & Trust Co. of Dallas v. Clay, 6633
| Decision Date | 19 March 1953 |
| Docket Number | No. 6633,6633 |
| Parties | TEXAS BANK & TRUST CO. OF DALLAS v. CLAY et al. |
| Court | Texas Court of Appeals |
Mattews & Nash, Dallas, for appellant.
Boyet Stevens, Daingerfield, for appellees.
LINCOLN Justice.
Appellant brought suit in the 95th Judicial District Court of Dallas County, Texas, against defendants W. O. Clay, Weldon H. Clay and Leo Connor, to recover the amount due under terms to two promissory notes alleged to have been executed by W. O. Clay in favor of the other two defendants, doing business in Titus County as a partnership under the firm name of Connor-Clay Motor Company. The notes were payable to the motor company, and were endorsed in blank, (with recourse) and appellant became the owner in due course for value. W. O. Clay filed his plea of privilege to be sued in Hill County, Texas, alleging that to be the county of his residence. The defendant Leo Connor filed his plea of privilege to be sued in Morris County, Texas, alleging that to be the county of his residence; and defendant Weldon H. Clay filed his plea of privilege to be sued in Titus County, Texas, alleging that to be the county of his residence. The appellant did not file controverting pleas, but prior to the date set for hearing on the respective pleas of privilege it filed a motion in the Dallas County District Court admitting that venue did not lie in that county, and moved the court to transfer the case for trial to Titus County, residence of Weldon H. Clay. Said motion, after notice, was sustained by the District Court and the entire cause was transferred to the District Court of Titus County. Thereafter, the defendants Leo Connor and W. O. Clay filed motions in the District Court of Titus County to dismiss as to them on the ground that appellant had not filed controverting pleas to their pleas of privilege, and that the court had sustained their pleas of privilege but had transferred the cause to Titus County instead of to their respective counties. The Titus County District Court sustained the motions of Connor and W. O. Clay, and entered separate orders, dismissing the suit as to them, but made no order respecting the other defendant, Weldon H Clay. The suit was thus left pending in Titus County against the defendant Weldon H. Clay.
Appellant excepted to the action of the District Court in dismissing as to the two defendants, gave notice of appeal to this court and the case is here upon a transcript showing all the proceedings in the District Court of Dallas County and in the District Court of Titus County.
The appellant challenges the action of the District Court of Titus County in dismissing the suit as to the two defendants named by seeking to uphold the action of the District Court of Dallas County in transferring the cause of Titus County. Some interesting questions are presented, but we are unable to discuss them further or to pass upon them for the reason that it is our opinion no final judgment was rendered in the District Court of Titus County, and consequently no appeal will lie to this court based upon the actions taken.
Article 2249, R.S. of Texas, Vernon's Ann.Civ.St. art. 2249, authorizes an appeal to the Court of Civil Appeals 'from every final judgment of the district court in civil cases * * *.'
The rule stated in Tex.Jur., Vol. 3-A, page 82, § 63, has been uniformly followed in this state: 'Aside from those instances in which an appeal from an interlocutory order is authorized, an appellate court cannot take jurisdiction...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Turner v. Chandler, 6993
...as now, there is no right of appeal from such order. Naylor v. Naylor, 60 Tex.Civ.App. 606, 128 S.W. 475; Texas Bank & Trust Co. of Dallas v. Clay, Tex.Civ.App., 257 S.W.2d 774, no writ history; Sec. 17:03, McDonald Texas Civil Practice, beginning at top of page 1309, Vol. 4; Pioneer Americ......
-
Howard Gault & Son, Inc. v. First Nat. Bank of Hereford
...Holland, 374 S.W.2d 803 (Tex.Civ.App.--Tyler 1964, no writ); Wootters v. Kauffman, 67 Tex. 488, 3 S.W. 465, 468; Texas Bank & Trust Co. of Dallas v. Clay, et al., 257 S.W.2d 774 (Tex.Civ.App.--Texarkana 1953, no writ). The granting of the new trial as to Thomas necessarily indicates that al......
-
Christian County v. Jones, No. 26026 (MO 11/30/2005)
... ... drawn on the County's account at the Ozark Bank, which had previously been selected by the County ... banking institutions, depositary banks and trust companies, banks or trust companies wherein any ... ...
-
Gallaher v. City Transp. Co. of Dallas
...Claxton, Tex.Civ.App., 291 S.W. 960 (no writ); Maxfield v. Dunagan, Tex.Civ.App., 254 S.W.2d 150, (no writ); Texas Bank & Trust Co. of Dallas v. Clay, Tex.Civ.App., 257 S.W.2d 774 (no There being no final judgment this court is without jurisdiction and the appeal must be dismissed. McGILL, ......