Varrs v. Faulkner
Decision Date | 07 June 1911 |
Citation | 138 S.W. 789 |
Parties | VARRS et al. v. FAULKNER et al. |
Court | Texas Court of Appeals |
Defendants in error seek to dismiss this writ of error on the ground that the judgment of the court below is not a final judgment.
It seems that H. F. Jamison, of Sparlin, Ill., was made a defendant in the lower court, but he did not answer, nor does it appear from the record that citation was served upon him, and no notice is taken of him in the judgment, or any other order of the court, and for that reason it is claimed the judgment is not final. The case of Moody v. Smoot, 78 Tex. 119, 14 S. W. 285, seems to be directly in point, and against the motion to dismiss. In that case it was said:
The motion to dismiss is overruled.
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Humble Oil & Refining Co. v. Johnston
...283 S. W. 298; Mathis v. Overland Auto Co. (Tex. Civ. App.) 265 S. W. 1069; Moody v. Smoot, 78 Tex. 119, 14 S. W. 285; Varrs v. Faulkner (Tex. Civ. App.) 138 S. W. 789; Porter v. P. & N. T. Ry. Co., 56 Tex. Civ. App. 479, 121 S. W. 897; Wilson v. Smith, 17 Tex. Civ. App. 188, 43 S. W. 1086;......
-
Youngstown Sheet & Tube Co. v. Penn
...purposes of appeal. See Moody v. Smoot, 78 Tex. 119, 14 S.W. 285; Mabry v. Lee, Tex.Civ.App., 319 S.W.2d 125 (wr. ref.); Varrs v. Faulkner, Tex.Civ.App., 138 S.W. 789 (no Respondents filed a number of affidavits in support of their motion for summary judgment. One of these was made by Gordo......
- Mauldin Drilling Co. v. Weyman
-
Kirk v. City of Gorman
...Burton-Lingo Co. v. First Baptist Church (Tex. Com. App.) 222 S. W. 203; Moody v. Smoot, 14 S. W. 285, 78 Tex. 119; Varrs v. Faulkner (Tex. Civ. App.) 138 S. W. 789; Porter v. Railway Co., 121 S. W. 897, 56 Tex. Civ. App. 479. Again, under the liberal rule adopted by the Supreme Court in Tr......