Rex Co. v. International Harvester Co.
| Decision Date | 07 December 1939 |
| Docket Number | No. 9262.,9262. |
| Citation | 107 F.2d 767 |
| Parties | REX CO. v. INTERNATIONAL HARVESTER CO. et al. |
| Court | U.S. Court of Appeals — Fifth Circuit |
Lloyd E. Elliott and M. N. Chrestman, both of Dallas, Tex., for appellant.
James Ralph Wood and H. T. Bowyer, both of Dallas, Tex., for appellees.
Before FOSTER, SIBLEY, and McCORD, Circuit Judges.
International Harvester Company brought suit against Rex Company and the Trustees of the Estate of J. B. Wilson, deceased, seeking a declaratory judgment under the provisions of 28 U.S.C.A. § 400, Jud.Code Sec. 274d. The petition sought a declaration of the rights of Rex Company in and to certain real property in Dallas, Texas. The cause was tried upon a stipulation of facts and the Court entered judgment declaring that Rex Company had no rights in the property.
In November, 1888, Dallas Cotton & Woolen Mills and D. Blankenship recorded a plat subdividing 47.3 acres of land in Dallas, Texas. The streets and alleys shown by the map were dedicated and donated to the City. Subsequent conveyances were made by reference to the City Map of the property. In later years the Industrial Company, a corporation purchased lots from various owners and became the owner of all the property bounded by Burnett, Austin, Alexander, and Cockrell Streets. This block of property was intersected by South Lamar Street, Dexter Street, and an alley. While Industrial held title to this block of property the City decided to relocate South Lamar Street. Industrial Company conveyed the land necessary for the relocation of this street. The City paid Industrial $2,800 for the right of way across the corner of its property and then by ordinance abandoned and vacated the streets and alleys intersecting the block. Thereafter the City of Dallas quitclaimed the public rights in the streets and alley to Industrial Company.
In 1932 the Trustees of the Wilson Estate acquired title through Industrial to all of the block of property bounded by Burnett, Austin, Alexander, and Cockrell Streets, with the exception of a triangular tract bounded by Alexander Street, Cockrell Avenue, and South Lamar Street as relocated. The instruments of conveyance to the Trustees contained descriptions which included the abandoned streets and alley in that portion of the block. Subsequently, through a chain of title going back to Industrial Company, the Rex Company acquired the remaining triangular tract of land above described.
On November 7, 1938, the Trustees entered into contract to sell their property to International Harvester Company. They agreed to convey a good and merchantable title and the Harvester Company agreed to pay $65,000 for the property. An abstract of title was furnished and the Harvester Company approved title except for a claim of Rex Company that it had a private right of easement in and to the abandoned streets and alley in the Trustees' tract. The Trustees contended that Rex Company had no such right of easement, and demanded that International Harvester Company consummate the contract by accepting a deed and paying the price agreed upon.
The Harvester Company thereupon filed its petition setting out at length the facts upon which Rex Company based its claim, and the contention and demands of the Trustees. By its petition the Harvester Company sought an adjudication of what rights, if any, Rex Company had in the property, and whether or not the Trustees had merchantable title free of any easement of the Rex Company. The Trustees and the Rex Company were named parties defendant.
Rex Company now questions the jurisdiction of the Court and contends that there was no real controversy between the Harvester Company and the Trustees of the Wilson Estate; that the only relief...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
OIL WORKERS INTER. UNION, ETC. v. Texoma Nat. Gas Co., 10971.
...the Board when this suit was filed. 5 Cf. Mississippi Power & Light Co. v. City of Jackson, 5 Cir., 116 F.2d 924; Rex Co. v. International Harvester Co., 5 Cir., 107 F.2d 767; Gaskill v. Thomson, 8 Cir., 119 F.2d 105; A. H. Belo Corp. v. Street, D.C., 35 F.Supp. 430; Id., D.C., 36 F. Supp. ......
-
James River Ins. Co. v. Arlington Pebble Creek, LLC
...not compel a realignment of the parties which would destroy [James River's] right to federal jurisdiction." See Rex Co. v. Int'l Harvester Co., 107 F.2d 767, 768 (5th Cir.1939).This Court finds that an actual, substantial controversy existed between James River and Campus Edge at the commen......
-
Texoma Natural Gas Co. v. OIL WORKERS IU, ETC.
...5 Cir., 125 F.2d 422; an action to determine whether a claimant actually owned an easement which it claimed, Rex Co. v. International Harvester Co., 5 Cir., 107 F.2d 767; an action to determine which of two groups of employees had the right, under a contract with a railroad, to perform work......
-
Texas Pac. Coal & Oil Co. v. Mayfield
...them as plaintiffs. Facts forming the basis of realignment must exist at the time of filing the original suit. Rex Co. v. International Harvester Co. et al., 5 Cir., 107 F.2d 767; First Trust & Savings Bank v. Iowa-Wisconsin Bridge Co., 8 Cir., 98 F.2d 416, certiorari denied Phoenix Finance......