State v. All Texas Racing Ass'n
| Decision Date | 28 October 1936 |
| Docket Number | No. 6968.,6968. |
| Citation | 97 S.W.2d 669 |
| Parties | STATE ex rel. SHOOK, Cr. Dist. Atty., v. ALL TEXAS RACING ASS'N et al. |
| Court | Texas Supreme Court |
This suit was instituted in the district court of Bexar county by John R. Shook, criminal district attorney of Bexar county, against All Texas Racing Association, a corporation, and others, as defendants. The purpose of the suit was to obtain an injunction to restrain and enjoin the defendants from operating a pari mutuel system of betting on the result of dog races run on certain premises in Bexar county. The premises upon which it was alleged that the race course was maintained were located upon a tract of land at the corner of New Seguin highway and the W. W. White road in precinct No. 3 of Bexar county. The suit was instituted under and by virtue of articles 4664-4666 of the Revised Statutes of 1925, defining a common nuisance and providing that same may be enjoined and abated in an action brought for that purpose by the district or county attorney of the county in which the nuisance is maintained, and under article 4667, which provides for an injunction in certain instances. The trial court granted a temporary injunction. The Court of Civil Appeals reversed the holding of the trial court, dissolved the injunction, and remanded the cause. 82 S. W.(2d) 151.
Article 4664, which defines a common nuisance, is as follows:
It is obvious from a careful reading of this article that the place sought to be declared a nuisance because of the operation of the race course, even if it be conceded that the conducting of same constitutes gambling, is not such place as is designated by the statute. It will be noted that the statute does not declare that any place "where persons resort for the purpose of gambling" is a nuisance. It is only any "hotel, rooming house or boarding house, country club, garage, rent car stand or other place to which the public commonly resort for board or lodging or commonly congregate for business or pleasure" which becomes a public nuisance when persons resort thereto for the purpose of gambling. The premises sought to be declared a nuisance in this instance are not within the provisions of this article. It follows, therefore, that as no nuisance exists by virtue of this statute, the district attorney has no authority under article 4666 to maintain an action for an injunction to abate or enjoin the same.
While the case is not briefed upon the theory that the district attorney was entitled to an injunction under article 4667, yet the pleadings refer...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Collier v. Poe
...v. Clark 135 Tex. 496, 143 S.W.2d 197 (1940); State v. Ferguson, 133 Tex. 60, 125 S.W.2d 272 (1939); State ex rel. Shook v. All Texas Racing Ass'n., 128 Tex. 384, 97 S.W.2d 669 (1936); Shrader v. Ritchey, 158 Tex. 154, 309 S.W.2d 812 (1958). And such policy extends to situations where the C......
-
Reed v. Wylie
...Stanford v. Butler, 142 Tex. 692, 181 S.W.2d 269 (1944); Fowler v. Hults, 138 Tex. 636, 161 S.W.2d 478 (1942); Shook v. All Texas Racing Assn., 128 Tex. 384, 97 S.W.2d 669 (1936); Farmers' and Mechanics' Nat. Bank v. Hanks, 104 Tex. 320, 137 S.W. 1120 (1911); Clynch v. Bowers, 164 S.W.2d 76......
-
State v. Socony Mobil Oil Co., 14290
...under this article a violation of the criminal statutes of this State must be alleged and proved. State ex rel. Shook v. All Texas Racing Ass'n, 128 Tex. 384, 97 S.W.2d 669, 100 S.W.2d 348. Appellees contend that an additional reason for denying an injunction herein is that the State has no......
-
Ex parte Thomas
...Clark , 135 Tex. 496, 143 S.W.2d 197 (1940) ; State v. Ferguson , 133 Tex. 60, 125 S.W.2d 272 (1939) ; State ex rel. Shook v. All Texas Racing Ass'n. , 128 Tex. 384, 97 S.W.2d 669 (1936) ; Shrader v. Ritchey , 158 Tex. 154, 309 S.W.2d 812 (1958). And such policy extends to situations where ......