Ortiz v. Spann, 1388
| Decision Date | 10 May 1979 |
| Docket Number | No. 1388,1388 |
| Citation | 586 S.W.2d 560 |
| Parties | Dr. Salvador ORTIZ, et ux., Appellants, v. Bob J. SPANN, et ux., Appellees. |
| Court | Texas Court of Appeals |
The plaintiffs, Bob J. Spann and wife, Dorothy Spann, brought suit against their adjoining neighbors, Dr. Salvador Ortiz and wife, Jennifer Ortiz, seeking a temporary restraining order and injunction to prohibit the defendants from cutting or trimming large oak trees allegedly belonging to the plaintiffs. In addition, plaintiffs sought damages in the amount of $75,000.00. The defendants in their sworn answer contended that the trees, in their present position, constituted a trespass upon their property, and that as a matter of law, they were entitled to cut or otherwise remove overhanging branches from their property. The trial court granted the temporary restraining order and set the case for hearing on the temporary injunction. After the hearing, the trial court granted a temporary injunction. It is from this temporary interlocutory order that the defendants appeal.
At the hearing on the temporary injunction, evidence was introduced (by way of bill of exception) and arguments were heard from the parties and/or their attorneys setting forth their various contentions. At the conclusion, the trial court granted the temporary injunction stating:
"Gentlemen, I am going to grant the temporary injunction and the reason I am is because if I deny it and if the limbs are cut, that would accomplish the purpose of the suit, and I have a rather lengthy case in which it says that the Court should never deny or grant a temporary injunction where the effect would be to accomplish the object of the suit."
The defendants in their appeal contend that: 1) there was no evidence introduced during the course of the temporary injunction hearing; 2) the trial court erred in overruling the special exception to plaintiffs' petition; and 3) the trial court erred in refusing to grant the defendants their request for a mandatory injunction against the plaintiffs.
The Supreme Court of Texas stated that the review of a temporary injunction in the Court of Civil Appeals presents the only question that was before the trial court: i. e., whether the plaintiff was entitled to preserve the status...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Ortiz v. Spann, 13-83-106-CV
...(defendants) from cutting or trimming the oak trees allegedly belonging to appellees (plaintiffs). Ortiz v. Spann, 586 S.W.2d 560 (Tex.Civ.App.--Corpus Christi 1979, writ ref'd n.r.e.). Subsequently, the trial court, hearing motions for summary judgment filed by both parties, granted a perm......
-
Birds Const., Inc. v. Gonzalez, 1630
...(Tex.Sup.1961); Southland Life Ins. Co. v. Egan, 126 Tex. 160, 86 S.W.2d 722 (Tex.Sup.1935). Compare: Ortiz v. Spann, 586 S.W.2d 560 (Tex.Civ.App. Corpus Christi 1979, writ ref'd n. r. e.). We are of the opinion that, considering the record in the light most favorable to the plaintiffs, the......