Translate
Text Highlighter

Bookmark

PDF

Share

Report a problem
AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)
Judges
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)
Judges

PANHANDLE MOTORS CO. v. FOSTER.

BOYCE, J.

The appellee has filed no brief, and we accept the statement of the case as made by appellant. Rule 40 (142 S.W. xiv) for Courts of Civil Appeals.

It appears that appellant's attorney failed to be present at the trial of the case, because of the fact that he was informed by the clerk of the court in which the case was pending that during the attorney's absence the cause had been continued and the jury discharged for the term. The attorney was warranted in relying on information received from this source, and it justified his failure to be present when the case was called for trial on the next morning. Fitzgerald v. Wygal, 24 Tex.Civ.App. 372, 59 S.W. 621. Under the circumstances we are of the opinion that the motion for new trial should have been granted.

Reversed and remanded.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

PANHANDLE MOTORS CO. v. FOSTER
(Nov 22, 1922)