Scranton v. Bell

Citations

• 35 Tex. 413

Syllabus

<p>1. After an appeal had been pending in this court for some seventeen years, the appellants moved to dismiss on the ground that the appeal bond given by them within the twenty days allowed by law after the adjournment of the court below was for an insufficient amount to give this court jurisdiction. But the record further shows that after the expiration of the twenty days, the appellants gave an additional appeal bond for a sum sufficient to comply with the requirements of Article 1491, Paschal’s Digest. Held, that the motion is an extraordinary one, and cannot be granted.</p> <p>2. When an appeal bond is defective because for an insufficient amount, the defect may be cured by giving an additional bond. The rulings relative to appeal bonds, made in Shelton v. Wade, 4 Texas, 148, are quoted by the court with approval; and it is held that in no case will the court sustain an appellant’s motion to dismiss his appeal, when the motion is predicated on his own laches.</p> <p>3. Upon the maxim stare decisis, the ruling of this court in The State v. Purcell, 16 Texas, 305, to the effect that limitation runs against this-State in suits for money, is applied to the present case ; but this ruling is not regarded as settled law.</p>