Camp v. Shannon, 5487

• Decision Date: 01 March 1961
• Docket Number: No. 5487,5487
• Citation: 344 S.W.2d 755
• Parties: Jesse R. CAMP et al., Appellants, v. Emery E. SHANNON, Appellee.
• Court: Texas Court of Appeals

Page 755

344 S.W.2d 755

Jesse R. CAMP et al., Appellants, v. Emery E. SHANNON, Appellee.

No. 5487.

Court of Civil Appeals of Texas, El Paso.

March 1, 1961.

Rehearing Denied March 29, 1961.

Deaderick & McMahon, Robert B. Cox, Odessa, for appellants.

Ramsey, Barber & Smith, Andrews, for appellee.

FRASER, Justice.

This is an appeal from an order of the District Court of Andrews County, Texas, which order temporarily enjoins the appellants from removing the appellee as President, or in any way interfering with the performance by the appellee of the duties of President of Tank Cleaners, Inc., or from issuing any unused stock or disposing of any assets of said corporation.

As stated in appellants' brief, this suit is apparently the culmination of disputes between two factions of stockholders within the corporation.

The trial court held that the share-holders' meeting, the basis of this suit, was illegal, and issued the injunction as the result of his findings to that effect. At the meeting it appears that all of the issued stock was represented in person or by proxy. The stockholders elected a new board of directors, which did not include the appellee. The trial court heard one witness, who was called by appellee as an adverse witness, and on the basis of this testimony, and, presumably, the arguments of counsel, the trial court granted the temporary injunction.

Appellee argues that this injunction is justified primarily on the ground of keeping a disputed subject matter in status quo until the merits of the case can be determined. We think that appellee's position is sound, and that the action of the trial court should be affirmed. It has long been held, and justification for such action is summed up best in an opinion by Justice Calvert, of the Supreme Court of Texas, in the case of Transport Co. of Texas v. Robertson Transports, Inc., 152 Tex. 551, 261 S.W.2d 549, 552. In that case the Supreme Court, speaking through Justice Calvert, points out:

'In a hearing on an application for a temporary injunction the only question before the court is the right of the applicant to a preservation of the status quo of the subject matter of the suit pending a final trial of the case on its merits (Cases cited). To warrant the issuance of the writ, the applicant need only show a probable right and a probable injury; he is not required to establish that he will finally prevail in the litigation.'

See also Seabrook Land Co. v.Lipscomb, Tex.Civ.App., 331 S.W.2d 429 (wr. dis'm.); Garcia v. Sun Oil Co., Tex.Civ.App., 300 S.W.2d 724 (n. r. e.), and lastly, a case that went up from this court--Southwest Weather Research, Inc. v. Jones, Tex., 327 S.W.2d 417. In this...