From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Arispe v. Clark

Court of Civil Appeals of Texas, San Antonio
Dec 5, 1917
199 S.W. 500 (Tex. Civ. App. 1917)

Opinion

No. 5927.

December 5, 1917.

Appeal from District Court, Jim Wells County; V. W. Taylor, Judge.

Action between Celso Arispe and others and Forrest Clark and others. From the judgment, Arispe and others appeal. Appeal dismissed.

T. Wesley Hook, of Kingsville, and L. Broeter, of Alice, for appellants. Dougherty Dougherty, of Beeville, and W. R. Perkins, of Alice, for appellees.


The appellants have not filed briefs in this court, and appellees have filed a brief which is not in compliance with rule 42 for the Courts of Civil Appeals (142 S.W. xiv). The judgment cannot be affirmed, but the appeal will be dismissed. In order for the appellees to have been entitled to an affirmance of the judgment, the case should have been briefed by them as provided in the rule cited. Suderman Dolson v. Carson, 122 S.W. 401; Bowman v. Hoffman, 28 Tex. Civ. App. 311, 67 S.W. 152; American Warehouse Co. v. Hamblen, 146 S.W. 1006; S.W. Oil Gas Co. v. Denny, 187 S.W. 973; Stocking v. Laas, 199 S.W. 500, this day decided by this court.

Appeal dismissed for want of prosecution.


Summaries of

Arispe v. Clark

Court of Civil Appeals of Texas, San Antonio
Dec 5, 1917
199 S.W. 500 (Tex. Civ. App. 1917)
Case details for

Arispe v. Clark

Case Details

Full title:ARISPE et al. v. CLARK et al

Court:Court of Civil Appeals of Texas, San Antonio

Date published: Dec 5, 1917

Citations

199 S.W. 500 (Tex. Civ. App. 1917)

Citing Cases

Edwards v. Holder

The failure to file a statement of facts is not alone ground for affirmance. If the defendant in error…