Magnolia Petroleum Co. v. Caswell
Decision Date | 18 January 1928 |
Docket Number | (No. 1030-4930.) |
Citation | 1 S.W.2d 597 |
Parties | MAGNOLIA PETROLEUM CO. et al. v. CASWELL et al. |
Court | Texas Supreme Court |
Suit by Anna E. Caswell and others against the Magnolia Petroleum Company and others, in which W. F. Brewer intervened. A judgment for plaintiff and intervener was affirmed in part and in part reversed and rendered by the Court of Civil Appeals (295 S. W. 653), and all parties bring error. Judgments reversed, and judgments rendered for defendants against plaintiffs and intervener.
F. D. Minor, of Beaumont, and W. H. Francis, A. S. Hardwicke, and Walace Hawkins, all of Dallas, for plaintiffs in error.
Howth, Adams & Hart and A. D. Lipscomb, all of Beaumont, for defendants in error.
This suit was originally filed in the district court of Jefferson county by Anna E. Caswell et al. against Magnolia Petroleum Company et al., for damages and injunction. One W. F. Brewer intervened. On final trial in the district court, judgment was rendered for plaintiff and intervener against all the defendants. The defendants appealed to the Court of Civil Appeals for the Ninth District at Beaumont, which court in part affirmed and in part reversed and rendered the judgment of the district court, Justice O'Quinn dissenting. The cause is now before this court on writs of error granted on motion of both the appellants and the appellees in the Court of Civil Appeals. The issues of the case are stated in the opinion of the Court of Civil Appeals. 295 S. W. 653.
A correct solution of the matters in litigation in this cause requires a construction of the following agreed judgment, entered by the district court of Jefferson county, Tex., on November 22, 1886, in consolidated causes Nos. 876 and 895, on the docket of said court, which judgment reads as follows:
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Long Island Owner's Ass'n, Inc. v. Davidson
...dedication). An easement extends to certain persons the right to use the land of another for a specific purpose. Magnolia Petroleum Co. v. Caswell, 1 S.W.2d 597, 600 (Tex. Comm'n App.1928, judgm't adopted); Miller v. Babb, 263 S.W. 253, 254 (Tex. Comm'n App.1924, judgm't adopted). Neither a......
-
St. John Missionary Baptist Church v. Flakes
...Brownlow , 319 S.W.3d 649, 653 (Tex. 2010) ("Express decretal language in a judgment controls over recitals.") citing Magnolia Petroleum Co. v. Caswell , 1 S.W.2d 597, 600 (Tex. Comm'n App.1928, judgm't adopted) and Nelson v. Britt , 241 S.W.3d 672, 676 (Tex. App.—Dallas 2007, no pet.) ("[W......
-
City of Houston v. McCarthy
...S.W. 253 (Tex.Com.App.1924); Settegast v. Foley Bros. Dry Goods Co., 114 Tex. 452, 270 S.W. 1014 (Tex.1925); Magnolia Petroleum Co. v. Caswell, 1 S.W.2d 597 (Tex.Com.App.1928); Clements v. Taylor, 184 S.W.2d 485 (Tex.Civ.App.--Eastland 'An easement is extinguished by a taking by eminent dom......
-
ONE HARBOR FINANCIAL LTD. v. Hynes Prop.
...ownership of two parcels, there could be no easement in favor of one lot operating as a burden to the other); Magnolia Petroleum Co. v. Caswell, 1 S.W.2d 597 (Tex.Com.App.1928) (recognizing that one cannot have an easement in his own land); Bales v. Butts, 309 Mo. 142, 274 S.W. 679 (1925) (......
-
CHAPTER 2 ACQUIRING EXPRESS RIGHTS-OF-WAY: DRAFTING CONSIDERATIONS
...the dominant, to which the right belongs, and the servient, upon which the obligation rests." Magnolia Petroleum Co. v. Caswell, 1 S.W.2d 597, 600 (Tex. 1928). [17] "An exclusive easement is less than a fee estate where the grant of the easement conveyed use privileges for less than all pos......