From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

McGee v. Anderson

Court of Civil Appeals of Texas, Austin
May 15, 1912
146 S.W. 1198 (Tex. Civ. App. 1912)

Opinion

April 24, 1912. Rehearing Denied May 15, 1912.

Appeal from District Court, McLennan County; Marshall Surratt, Judge.

Action by Mabel Anderson and others against Ben McGee and others. From a judgment for plaintiffs, defendant McGee appeals. Affirmed.

J. D. Williamson, of Waco, for appellant.

James E. Yeager, of Waco, for appellee.


We refer to the opinion of this court when the case was on appeal before for a full statement of the nature of the case and of the facts upon which the rights of the parties depend. Anderson v. McGee, 130 S.W. 1041. This court reversed the case, with instructions to the trial court to render a particular judgment, which at the last trial was done, and, in order to sustain the present appeal, would require this court to overrule and reverse its former decision. A reconsideration of the questions of law decided upon the former appeal has led to the conclusion that our former decision was correct, and for that reason all the assignments of error presented in appellant's brief are overruled.

We also overrule appellees' motion to dismiss the appeal, and to disregard appellant's bills of exception, as well as their request to amend the transcript, so as to make it show the action of this court on the former appeal. Upon the last point we hold that this court should take judicial knowledge of its former decision in the same case.

No reversible error having been shown, the judgment is affirmed.

Affirmed.


Summaries of

McGee v. Anderson

Court of Civil Appeals of Texas, Austin
May 15, 1912
146 S.W. 1198 (Tex. Civ. App. 1912)
Case details for

McGee v. Anderson

Case Details

Full title:McGEE v. ANDERSON et al

Court:Court of Civil Appeals of Texas, Austin

Date published: May 15, 1912

Citations

146 S.W. 1198 (Tex. Civ. App. 1912)

Citing Cases

Village Mills Co. v. Houston Oil of Texas

" See, also, the following authorities in support of the proposition: Good v. Texas Pac. Ry. Co. et al., 166…