From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Ft. Worth Rio Grande Ry. Co. v. Kinder

Court of Civil Appeals of Texas
May 25, 1907
121 S.W. 569 (Tex. Civ. App. 1907)

Opinion

Decided May 25, 1907.

Dismissal of Appeal — Reinstatement.

When an appeal has been dismissed on motion of appellant before appearance by appellee the case will not be reinstated upon motion of appellee in order that appellee might suggest delay and ask for the statutory damages. Appellant has the right to have his appeal dismissed before appearance by appellee.

Appeal from the District Court of Johnson County. Tried below before Hon. O. L. Lockett.

No briefs.


On a former day of this term, to wit, May 11, 1907, at the request of appellant, we dismissed the appeal in this case, assessing the appellant with costs.

The appellee now presents a motion to reinstate the cause and be allowed to file a motion to assess ten per cent damages for delay. Appellee's motion, we think, comes too late. Before the order of dismissal was made the appellee had not appeared in the case by brief, cross-assignment of error, nor suggestion of delay. This being the state of the record it was the right of appellant to have it dismissed as no rights of the appellee were prejudiced, as shown by the record. Elliott's Appellate Procedure, sec. 534. That appellee intended at some time to suggest delay and ask the assessment of the ten per cent damages allowed by statute, in delay cases, is not a sufficient reason to authorize the court to reinstate the case and hear the suggestion.

The motion is refused.

Motion refused.


Summaries of

Ft. Worth Rio Grande Ry. Co. v. Kinder

Court of Civil Appeals of Texas
May 25, 1907
121 S.W. 569 (Tex. Civ. App. 1907)
Case details for

Ft. Worth Rio Grande Ry. Co. v. Kinder

Case Details

Full title:FT. WORTH RIO GRANDE RAILWAY COMPANY v. R. C. KINDER

Court:Court of Civil Appeals of Texas

Date published: May 25, 1907

Citations

121 S.W. 569 (Tex. Civ. App. 1907)
121 S.W. 569

Citing Cases

Shelton v. Shelton

189 S.W. 1090. But the language used in the court's charge did, we think, single out and emphasize in the…

Adams et al. v. Adams

When we had that case before us (211 S.W. 506), on a thorough review of all the authorities in point we held…