Cases argued and decided in the Supreme Court of Texas, during the latter part of the Tyler term, 1874, and the first part of the Galveston term, 1875. Volume 42. Page: 51
The following text was automatically extracted from the image on this page using optical character recognition software:
1875.] KING v. HOPKINS. 51
Opinion of the court.
3. Because there are two appeal bonds, neither of which.
complies with the requirements of law. This motion was
also overruled, and the cause was submitted to a jury, and
appellant declining to offer any evidence, the jury, under
the instructions of the court, returned a verdict for appellee.
It is apparent that the first appeal bond failed to comply
with the requirements of the statute under which it was
taken and in force at that time, and it was properly held
by the court to be insufficient. It was not conditioned for
the prosecution of the appeal with effect, and for the performance
of the judgment, sentence, or decree of the District
Court, as required by the statute, on appeals from the
county court to the District Court. (Pas. Dig., art. 6085.)
The refusal of the court to dismiss the appeal, and permitting
the appellant in that court to file a new bond, is
the main question in the case. The statute already referred
to provides that the appeal bond shall be given within
ten days after the adjournment of the county court, to be
approved by the county clerk.
The second appeal bond was executed in the District
Court, and approved by the district clerk, more than three
months after the cause had been carried to the District
Court on appeal. The conditions of the statutory bond
for an appeal from the County Court are almost identical
with the bond for the removal of a cause by appeal from
the District Court to the Supreme Court. The act of 1846,
regulating appeals to the Supreme Court, requires the
bond to be given within twenty days after the term at
which the judgment was rendered; and where the twenty
days had elapsed before the bond was given, there was no
jurisdiction, and the judgment of the Supreme Court was
held at a subsequent term to be a nullity. (Burr v. Lewis,
6 Tex., 81.)
The cases in which new appeal bonds have been given
have not been extended further than to cure defects for in
Here’s what’s next.
This book can be searched. Note: Results may vary based on the legibility of text within the document.
Tools / Downloads
Get a copy of this page or view the extracted text.
Citing and Sharing
Basic information for referencing this web page. We also provide extended guidance on usage rights, references, copying or embedding.
Reference the current page of this Book.
Texas. Supreme Court. Cases argued and decided in the Supreme Court of Texas, during the latter part of the Tyler term, 1874, and the first part of the Galveston term, 1875. Volume 42., book, 1881; St. Louis, Mo.. (texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth28531/m1/59/?rotate=270: accessed October 19, 2018), University of North Texas Libraries, The Portal to Texas History, texashistory.unt.edu; .