McCloskey v. San Antonio Public Service Co., 8972.
| Decision Date | 15 June 1932 |
| Docket Number | No. 8972.,8972. |
| Citation | 51 S.W.2d 1088 |
| Parties | McCLOSKEY v. SAN ANTONIO PUBLIC SERVICE CO. |
| Court | Texas Court of Appeals |
Appeal from District Court, Bexar County; F. Stevens, Judge.
Suit by the San Antonio Public Service Company against F. P. McCloskey. From a judgment granting an injunction, defendant appeals.
Affirmed.
D. A. McAskill and D. H. Zook, both of San Antonio, for appellant.
Templeton, Brooks, Napier & Brown and C. R. Kennon, all of San Antonio, for appellee.
Appellee applied for an injunction to restrain appellant, his servants, agents and employees "from seeking to obtain employment for the defendant from any claimant who has a claim against the plaintiff, by means of personal solicitation by the defendant of such employment, or by procuring others to solicit the employment of the defendant in any such claim, and from mailing or sending any card, letter, communication or message to people who are in accidents where plaintiff is concerned until after they first communicate with the defendant, and from directly or indirectly giving or promising anything of value and promising to pay the court costs and other expenses for such claimant, in order to obtain employment in any such claim, and from instigating and filing suits and claims against the plaintiff in which the defendant has obtained an alleged interest by said unlawful means. * * *" It may with certainty be stated, in the light of a bound volume of facts, containing about three hundred pages, that the facts and circumstances were thoroughly "probed," to use a characteristic journalistic or reportorial term, when speaking of an investigation of any character. After the thorough probing had been completed, the court granted a temporary injunction, as follows:
"Against the said defendant, F. P. McCloskey, enjoining and restraining him, his agents, servants and employees, during the pendency of this suit, from seeking to obtain employment for said defendant from any claimant who has a claim against the plaintiff, San Antonio Public Service Company, by means of personal solicitation by said defendant of such employment, or by procuring others to solicit the employment of said defendant in any such claim, and from mailing or sending any card, letter, communication or message to people who are in accidents where plaintiff is concerned until after they first communicate with the defendant, and from directly or indirectly giving or promising anything of value, and from promising to pay the court costs and other expenses for such claimant, in order to obtain employment in any such claim."
Thirty-six witnesses were heard, and it is regrettable that the expenditure of time and energy did not result in a final judgment forever placing the seal of judicial condemnation on the practices and course of conduct so vividly depicted in the record.
The evidence is overwhelming in establishing that appellant has for years made a business of trampling upon the laws as to barratry in Texas, article 430, P. C. The law is full and complete in defining barratry in its every phase, and the evidence showed an organized system and plan to evade, if not to defy, every provision of the statute. An office was equipped, agents were employed, attorneys held in readiness, and no accident was reported in which any person was injured, or in the view of the leading spirit of the barratrous concern should have been injured, but that the emissaries of the guiding spirit were turned loose upon him. He gave advice as to seeking a bed in a hospital or at home, counseled as to what doctors should be employed, and what attorneys should be consulted. Cards were issued by appellant, McCloskey, filled with rich counsel born of a ripe experience. It is a unique production and we preserve it. It is as follows:
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
West Virginia State Bar v. Earley
...226; Stewart Abstract Company v. Judicial Commission of Jefferson County, Tex.Civ.App., 131 S.W.2d 686; McCloskey v. San Antonio Public Service Company, Tex.Civ.App., 51 S.W.2d 1088; Commonwealth v. Jones and Robins, 186 Va. 30, 41 S.E.2d 720; Paul v. Stanley, 168 Wash. 371, 12 P.2d 401; 5 ......
-
Southern Traffic Bureau v. Thompson
...to any other person who may be guilty of any of the things set forth in this article. * * *' In the case of McCloskey v. San Antonio Public Service Co., Tex.Civ.App., 51 S.W.2d 1088, this Court held that when the property rights of an individual or corporation were threatened by the solicit......
-
Stewart Abstract Co. v. Judicial Commission
...have power to enjoin the illegal practice of law. We think unquestionably the courts do have such power. McCloskey v. San Antonio Public Service Co., Tex.Civ.App., 51 S.W.2d 1088, writ refused. Unauthorized practice of law constitutes a contempt of court. People ex rel. Ill. Bar Ass'n v. Pe......
-
Atchison, T.&S.F. Ry. Co. v. Andrews
...for refusing it.’ There are, however, several cases that have a bearing upon the question before us. In McCloskey v. San Antonio Public Service Co., Tex.Civ.App., 51 S.W.2d 1088, it was held that a court of equity had jurisdiction to enjoin McCloskey from fomenting litigation by soliciting ......