City of Electra v. Cross
Decision Date | 30 October 1920 |
Docket Number | (No. 9607.) |
Citation | 225 S.W. 795 |
Parties | CITY OF ELECTRA v. CROSS et al. |
Court | Texas Court of Appeals |
Appeal from District Court, Wichita County; P. A. Martin, Judge.
Action by the City of Electra against D. T. Cross and others. From an order dissolving a temporary writ of injunction, plaintiff appeals. Affirmed.
Harris & Graham, of Dallas, for appellant.
E. E. Kelley, of Wichita Falls, for appellees.
The city of Electra was granted a temporary writ of injunction restraining D. T. Cross, A. H. Beals, and F. F. Moore from erecting, maintaining, and operating what is commonly termed a "filling station" to be placed at the intersection of two of the public streets in said city; the alleged purpose of said filling station being the storage of gasoline, lubricating oils, etc., to be offered for sale to the public.
As soon as the petition was filed, it was presented to the judge of the district court, who acted upon it in chambers and granted a temporary writ restraining the defendants from constructing and operating the filling station; but later, upon a hearing of the defendants' motion to quash the writ, at which hearing both parties appeared, the temporary writ was dissolved by the court in regular session. From that order, the plaintiff has prosecuted this appeal. The order of the trial court dissolving the temporary writ further provided that the operation of the order should be suspended, pending the appeal.
The defendants did not file any answer to the merits of the petition, but filed only a motion to dissolve the temporary writ of injunction, and the only grounds urged for the dissolution of the injunction consisted, substantially, of a general demurrer to the sufficiency of the petition, and the sufficiency of the petition as against that demurrer was the only question passed on by the trial court; no evidence being introduced by either party.
Following is a copy of plaintiff's petition:
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Continental Oil Co. v. City of Twin Falls
... ... vehicles, in order to be served at such public service ... gasoline stations, have to cross a sidewalk or sidewalks in ... the City of Twin Falls ... [49 ... Idaho 97] "Section 2. That no permit shall be granted by ... the ... business or residence district, is a lawful business. (42 C ... J., p. 1304; City of Electra v. Cross, (Tex. Civ ... App.) 225 S.W. 795.) A drive-in type gasoline filling station ... is not a nuisance per se ... (42 C. J., p. 1304; note, ... ...
- Standard Oil Co v. Kahn, (No. 6155.)
-
Standard Oil Co. v. Kahn
... ... 350, 97 ... S.E. 162; Texas Co. v. Brandt, 79 Okl. 97, 191 P ... 166; City of Electra v. Cross (Tex. Civ. App.) 225 ... S.W. 795; Lewis v. Berney (Tex. Civ. App.) 230 S.W ... ...
-
Phillips v. Allingham
...in the value of complainant's property is not alone sufficient. Rhodes v. Dunbar, 57 Pa. 274, 98 Am. Dec. 221.” In City of Electra v. Cross (Tex. Civ. App.) 225 S. W. 795, 796, a case in which it was sought to enjoin the erection and maintenance of a gasoline filling station at which it was......