State ex rel. McKie v. Bullock, B-3652
| Decision Date | 07 March 1973 |
| Docket Number | No. B-3652,B-3652 |
| Citation | 491 S.W.2d 659 |
| Parties | The STATE of Texas ex rel. William J. McKIE v. Robert D. BULLOCK, Secretary of State, et al. |
| Court | Texas Supreme Court |
Beard & Kultgen, Pat Beard, and Glenn Sodd, Waco, Jimmy Morris, Corsicana, for petitioner.
John L. Hill, Atty. Gen., J. C. Davis, Asst. Atty. Gen., Austin, Mays, Jacobs & Pevehouse, J. C. Jacobs, Corsicana, Clark, Thomas, Harris, Denius & Winters, Mary Joe Carroll, and Donald S. Thomas, Austin, for respondents.
This litigation was brought by a county attorney in the name of the State of Texas on the relation of William J. McKie, a qualified voter residing in Navarro County. The object of the suit was injunction to prevent the name of H. D. Nicholson, candidate for Judge of the 13th Judicial District (Navarro County), from appearing on the ballot in the general election of November 1972; plaintiff also requested a declaration that candidate Nicholson was not and would not be qualified to occupy the office of district judge. The plaintiff contended that Nicholson had not 'been a practicing lawyer or a Judge of a Court in this State, . . . for four (4) years next preceding his election' as required by Tex.Const. art. V, § 7, Vernon's Ann.St.
Both the trial court and the court of civil appeals held against the plaintiff. 485 S.W.2d 378. In the meantime, Mr. Nicholson's name was placed on the ballot and he was elected; he now occupies the office. Therefore, the only relief requested by plaintiff which is not now moot is a declaratory judgment on the issue of Judge Nicholson's qualifications. We believe that declaratory relief would be improper under the principles discussed below.
When, during the pendency of a bill for injunction and declaratory relief, the deed sought to be prevented is accomplished and suitable coercive relief becomes impossible, it is improper to grant declaratory relief. In Hulett v. West Lamar Rural High School Dist., 149 Tex. 289, 232 S.W.2d 669 (1950), taxpayers sued to enjoin the school district from paying out funds for the construction of school buildings. By the time the cause reached the Supreme Court, the buildings had been built and the contractor had been paid. Although injunction was then impossible, the taxpayers still requested a declaration that the school district's action was illegal. The Court held that, upon payment to the contractor, declaratory relief in favor of the taxpayers would not be proper since the taxpayers had no...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
City of Dallas v. Vsc Llc
...is highly speculative and theoretical, incapable of settling any actual controversy between the parties. See id.; State ex rel. McKie v. Bullock, 491 S.W.2d 659, 660 (Tex.1973) (holding that there could be no declaratory judgment action where a declaration would not settle an actual controv......
-
Hunt v. City of Longview
...and exclusive procedure to declare that an official is no longer qualified to occupy his or her elected office. See State ex rel. McKie v. Bullock, 491 S.W.2d 659 (Tex. 1973); Toyah Independent School Dist. v. Pecos-Barstow Consol. Independent School Dist., 497 S.W.2d 455 (Tex.Civ.App. — El......
-
Port of Corpus Christi, LP v. Port of Corpus Christi Auth. of Nueces Cnty.
...accomplished and 'suitable coercive relief' becomes impossible, it is improper to grant declaratory relief." (quoting McKie v. Bullock, 491 S.W.2d 659, 660 (Tex. 1973)); Waterblasting Techs., 491 S.W.3d at 906 (explaining that when a request for injunctive relief becomes moot, an accompanyi......
-
Orix Capital Mkts., LLC v. American Realty Trust, Inc.
...right to hold the office is in a proceeding in the nature of quo warranto. Snow, 114 S.W.2d at 901; see State ex rel. McKie v. Bullock, 491 S.W.2d 659, 660–61 (Tex.1973) (per curiam) (stating only remedy available to challenge elected candidate's qualifications to hold office is quo warrant......