no jurisdiction when right to possession depended on disputed compliance with “contract to purchase”
How later courts described this case
- no jurisdiction when right to possession depended on disputed compliance with “contract to purchase”
- no jurisdiction when right to possession depended on compliance with “contract to purchase”
- denying jurisdiction when question of contractual compliance clouded title
Written by the judges who cited it.
The opinion
On Rehearing
In our original opinion we stated that in the Justice Court suit an amicus curiae pleading was filed by Cecil Wood-gate. The record shows that after the suit was filed J. Von Brown communicated with Woodgate, who is an attorney. It was in response to this call that Woodgate filed the amicus curiae pleading. His doing so constituted an appearance on the part of J. Von Brown, and cured any defect in the service on Brown, if there was any, in the Justice Court suit. Burger v. Burger, Tex., 298 S.W.2d 119 .
In other particulars we believe our conclusions in our original opinion were correct.
The motion for rehearing is overruled.
On Second Motion for Rehearing
The amicus curiae pleading filed in the Justice Court proceeding by its terms included both J. Von Brown and American Spiritualist Association. We therefore hold that the filing of the amicus curiae pleading constituted an appearance in the Justice Court proceeding of both J. Von Brown and American Spiritualist Association.
In other respects the second motion for rehearing is overruled.