Robinson v. City of Dallas, 9543.
| Citation | 193 S.W.2d 821 |
| Decision Date | 03 April 1946 |
| Docket Number | No. 9543.,9543. |
| Court | Texas Court of Appeals |
| Parties | ROBINSON v. CITY OF DALLAS. |
Appeal from District Court, Dallas County; Wm. M. Cramer, Judge.
Suit by Nathan Robinson against the City of Dallas to enjoin defendant from cancelling a liquor package store permit and for a declaratory judgment. From an adverse judgment, plaintiff appeals.
Affirmed.
J. Manuel Hoppenstein, of Dallas, for appellant.
H. P. Kucera, City Atty., and A. J. Thuss, Asst. City Atty., both of Dallas, for appellee.
Nathan Robinson sued the City of Dallas to enjoin it from canceling a liquor package store permit the city had issued to him, and for a judgment declaratory of his rights under the City's Ordinance No. 3373, prohibiting permits to establishments within 300 feet of a church, and prescribing the method for measuring the 300 feet. The trial was to the court upon an agreed statement of facts, and the judgment was in favor of the city. Robinson has appealed.
Robinson's brief states that the sole issue for determination is the correct method of measurement under the ordinance, the pertinent part of which reads: "No license or permit of any kind provided for under this ordinance shall be issued to any dealer * * * where the place of business of any such dealer is within 300 feet of any church, * * * measurements to be made along the property line of street fronts, and from front door to front door, and in a direct line across intersections (streets) where they occur; * * *."
The situation and the respective methods of measurement contended for is shown by the following tracing of a blue print map attached to the agreed statement:
NOTE: OPINION CONTAINING TABLE OR OTHER DATA THAT IS NOT VIEWABLE
Robinson operates a drug store under the name of Forest Avenue Pharmacy in a brick building at the corner of Forest and Oakland Avenues.
The church fronts on the west side of Oakland Avenue, which is 60 ft. wide between property lines. Its front door is 15 ft. E of the property line. The package store is in the above brick building abutting on the west property line of Oakland Avenue, its north wall being 15 ft. S of the S property line of Forest Avenue, which intersects Oakland Avenue at right angles. The 15-foot space between the N wall of the package store and the S property line of Forest Avenue is vacant. The front door of the package store is in the N wall of the building 15 ft. S of the south property line of Forest Avenue, and 21 ft. 6 in. W of the west property line of Oakland Avenue; and appears to be readily accessible from either Forest Avenue to the N or Oakland Avenue to the E. Robinson contends for the following method of measurement: Begin at the church door; thence 15 ft. to E line of O. Ave.; thence N along said line 202 ft. to S line of F. Ave.; thence west 81 ft. 6 in., crossing O. Ave. to a point on its F. Ave. S property line opposite package store door; thence S 15 ft. to said door; in all (15+202+81.5+15) 313.5 ft. The City's measurement follows: Begin at church door; thence W 15 ft. to E. line of O. Ave.; thence continuing W 60 ft. to its W property line; thence N along said line 187 ft. to N. E. corner package store building; thence W 21 ft. 6 in. to its door; in all (15+60+187+21.5) 283.5 ft.
The ordinance appears to have been construed in only two cases, neither of which has direct bearing upon the issue at bar. Hallum v. Liquor Board, Tex.Civ. App., 166 S.W.2d 175 (error ref.); Stubbs v. Texas Liquor Control Board, Tex.Civ. App., 166 S.W.2d 178 (error ref. W. M.). The holding in the Hallum case was that at street intersections the crossing should be diagonally instead of crossing each street at right angles. That in the Stubbs case was that a church might have more than one front door, and that a Sunday School door constituted a front door. No other authority is cited by either party having...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Kiges v. City of St. Paul
...v. City of Bellaire, Tex.Civ.App., 200 S.W.2d 224; S. B. Garage Corp. v. Murdock, 185 Misc. 55, 55 N.Y.S.2d 456; Robinson v. City of Dallas, Tex.Civ.App., 193 S.W.2d 821. ...
-
T & R Associates, Inc. v. City of Amarillo
...(1936); Davis v. City of Abilene, 250 S.W.2d 685, 688 (Tex.Civ.App.--Eastland 1952, writ ref'd); Robinson v. City of Dallas, 193 S.W.2d 821, 823 (Tex.Civ.App.--Austin 1946, writ ref'd). The exception to the general rule of non-estoppel on the part of the City, i.e., detrimental reliance upo......
-
W. H. Barber Co. v. City of Minneapolis, s. 34637
...200 S.W.2d 224;Matter of S. B. Garage Corporation v. Murdock, 185 Misc. 55, 55 N.Y.S.2d 456;Robinson v. City of Dallas, Tex.Civ.App., 193 S.W.2d 821. This rule has most recently found expression in this court in The Alexander Co. case as follows (222 Minn. 320, 24 N.W.2d 249): ‘The city eng......
-
W. H. Barber Co. v. City of Minneapolis
...Tex.Civ.App., 200 S.W.2d 224; Matter of S. B. Garage Corporation v. Murdock, 185 Misc. 55, 55 N.Y.S.2d 456; Robinson v. City of Dallas, Tex.Civ.App., 193 S.W.2d 821. This rule has most recently found expression in this court in The Alexander Co. case as follows (222 Minn. 320, 24 N.W.2d "Th......