
    SCROGGINS v. L. R. NEECE LUMBER CO. et al.
    (Court of Civil Appeals of Texas. Dallas.
    June 3, 1911.)
    Appeal and Eeeoe (§ 1169*) — Reveesai>-Failube to File Findings and Conclusions.
    Failure of the trial judge after due request to prepare and file conclusions of law and fact as required by Acts 30th Leg. (1st Ex. Sess.) 1907, c. 7, is reversible error.
    [Ed. Note. — For other eases, see Appeal and Error, Cent. Dig. § 4537; Dec. Dig. § 1169.*)
    Appeal from District Court, Freestone County; H. B. Daviss, Judge.
    ' Action between George L. Scroggins and the L. R. Neece Lumber Company, and from the judgment Scroggins appeals.
    Reversed and remanded.
    D. T. Garth, for appellant.
   RAINEY, C. J.

We find in the record a bill of exceptions duly signed by the trial judge that in due time after the trial was ended, the case having been tried by the court without a jury, the appellant filed a written request for the court to prepare and file conclusions of law and fact, which request was duly called- to the attention of the judge within said term and before final adjournment, but the judge failed to comply with said request, and said cause is here without any conclusions of law and fact.

The judge appended to the bill reasons why such conclusions were not prepared and filed, which exonerate him from willful neglect, but it does .not relieve the appellant of being deprived of a substantial right to which he is entitled under the statute.

For the 4error in failing to prepare and file such conclusions (Wandry v. Williams [Sup.] 124 S. W. 86), the judgment is reversed and the cause remanded.  