Opinion

Texas Employers' Ins. Ass'n v. Lemons

  • 52 S.W.2d 767
  • 1932 Tex. App. LEXIS 770
Court
Court of Appeals of Texas
Filed
Jun 16, 1932
Status
Published
On the bench
Walthall
Cited by
1 cases
Authority
More cited than 12.3%

The opinion

On Rehearing.

Appellant filed this suit in the district court of Dallas county to set aside an award of the Industrial Accident Board in favor of appellees.

In its petition it alleged: “That heretofore to-wit, on the 26th day of March A. D. 1929, the Industrial Accident Board of the State of Texas, made and entered its final ruling and decision in the matter of O. O. Lemons, employee, v. Olive & Myers Mfg. Company, employer, and the Texas Employers Insurance Association, insurer, and the amount of defendant’s claim as filed with the said Industrial Accident Board is in excess of $500.00 and sufficient to give this court jurisdiction.”

The agreed statement of facts does not contain the award of the Industrial Accident Board, but does contain this stipulation: “It was further admitted by and between the plaintiff and the defendant that the Industrial Accident Board rendered a final ruling and decision in this case of O. O. Lemons on the 20th day of March 1929.”

In a supplemental motion for rehearing appellant moves to set aside our judgment of affirmance, grant a rehearing, and to reverse the judgment of the court below and to dismiss this entire proceeding for the reason that the district court had no jurisdiction of the cause of action involved herein, and therefore this court has none, because no final award was ever made by the Industrial Accident Board of Texas, which could be the basis of -an appeal to the district court of Dallas county, Tex., or upon which a suit to set aside such award could be based.

In support of the motion appellant attaches a certified copy of the award of the board dated March 26, 1929, of like effect as that in Tally v. Texas, etc. (Tex. Com. App.) 48 S.W.(2d) 988 .

It is well settled that an appellate court cannot consider evidence dehors the record for the purpose of impeaching the jurisdiction of the trial court. See opinion on rehearing in City of Austin v. Nalle, 85 Tex. 520 , 22 S. W. 668, 960 ; 3 Tex. Jur. § 304, and cases there cited.

For this court to consider the certified copy of the award of the Industrial Accident *771 Board as an impeachment of the jurisdiction of the district court would offend against the rule indicated. Especially is this true in view of the fact that it is an attempt by appellant to contradict its own allegations and the stipulation noted above. Eor these reasons the case of Tally v. Texas, etc., supra, cited by appellant, has no application.

The matters contained in the original motion for rehearing have been sufficiently discussed in the main opinion.

The original and supplemental motions' for rehearing are both overruled.

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.