Gammel's Rules of the Courts of Texas Page: 48 of 70
The following text was automatically extracted from the image on this page using optical character recognition software:
TEXAS COURT RULES.
can be reviewed only when exception is reserved and presented in proper
bill of exception. Where the order of the court overruling the motion for
continuance was entered in the minutes, and the exception there noted,
but the minute of the proceedings of the court below did not make the
application for continuance a part of the record, held insufficient. Darby
et al. vs. White, 165 S. W. R., 481; Railway Co. vs. Blackburn, 155 S. W.
R., 625; Posey vs. Lumber Co., 142 S. W. R., 931. Where the bill of
exception does not set out the application for continuance, nor the substance
thereof, and it cannot be ascertained from the bill itself whether
or not the application was sufficient, held insufficient to authorize the
court to reveiw the action of the trial court in overruling the application
for continuance. Smith vs. Huff et ux, 164 S. W. R., 429. See, Weatherford
M. W. American Nat.
Life Ins. Co. vs. Rowell, 175 S. W. R., 170.
(3) Rules 56-60.-Exceptions to Admission or Exclusion of Evidence.
An assignment complaining of the admission of certain testimony objected
to, will be overruled, where there is no bill of exception to such ruling.
Thomas et al. vs. Barthold et al., 171 S. W. R., 1071. Held, where the
testimony objected to is not stated in the bill of exception reserved, the
assignment predicated thereupon will not be considered. This is the uniform
practice of the higher courts of Texas, from the earliest reports of
the Supreme Court down to the present day. Denton vs. English, 171
S. W. R., 248; Styles vs. Gray, 10 T., 503; Saunders vs. Kincaid, 168
S. W. R., 977; Solomon vs. National Bank, 168 S. W. R., 1029. Held, the
action of the trial court in excluding the evidence of a witness cannot be
reviewed, unless the bill of exception definitely shows that the witness
would have testified to the facts sought to be proven. Miller et al. vs.
Campbell, 171 S. W. R., 251. The court will be confined to the objections
made in the bill of exceptions. Brown vs. Southern Gas Co., 176 S. W.
R., 73. Irwin vs. Jackson, 230 S. W. R., 522. Held, bill modified by the
court without objection cannot be attacked. Rhodes vs. El Paso
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.
Moffett, James William. Gammel's Rules of the Courts of Texas, book, 1922; Austin, Texas. (texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth5836/m1/48/: accessed November 18, 2017), University of North Texas Libraries, The Portal to Texas History, texashistory.unt.edu; .