Stecher v. City of Houston, 12760
| Decision Date | 18 November 1954 |
| Docket Number | No. 12760,12760 |
| Citation | 272 S.W.2d 925 |
| Parties | H. K. STECHER, Appellant, v. CITY OF HOUSTON et al., Appellees. |
| Court | Texas Court of Appeals |
Walter S. Hart, Ira V. Hart, Al L. Crystal, Houston, for appellant.
Will G. Sears, City Atty., Robert L. Burns, Senior Asst. City Atty., Charles A. Easterling, Asst. City Atty., Houston, for appellee.
H. K. Stecher, as plaintiff, instituted this suit in the District Court of Harris County, against the City of Houston, its Chief of Police and City Attorney, and the Attorney General of Texas, seeking to enjoin the enforcement of a penal traffic ordinance of the City of Houston, and a declaratory judgment holding such ordinance to be void and unconstitutional. The named defendants in the trial court filed a special exception to the petition asserting lack of jurisdiction in the court to grant the injunctive relief sought on the ground that such relief could be granted only where a vested property right is involved. This exception was sustained by the court. Thereafter, after a hearing before the court without a jury, the trial court entered its order dismissing the cause for want of jurisdiction. In Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law filed, the court found the ordinance in question to be a valid regulation of traffic on the public streets of the City of Houston. Plaintiff has appealed from both orders entered.
The material facts are stated in the Findings of Fact filed by the trial court, as follows:
'1. The City of Houston has enacted a code of ordinances entitled The City Code of 1942. The following sections were in effect at all times material to this suit:
'The code provides that violation of Section 2247 shall be punishable by a fine not to exceed $200.
'2. Pursuant to authority regularly vested in him by law, the Traffic Engineer of the City of Houston has designated certain truck loading zones on various portions of various public streets in the City as contemplated by Section 2247(b). These truck loading zones are marked along the curb by standard traffic signs and street markings. The evidence shows that by far the major portion of these truck zones are found to be necessary on streets of the central business district of the City of Houston.
'3. Plaintiff in this case, H. K. Stecher, is an individual doing business in Houston. He operates a business known as H. K. Stecher Stationery Service and in such business drives and operates a 1949 Dodge Sedan Passenger Automobile for purposes of delivery of supplies to persons in the office buildings of the downtown area or central business district of the City of Houston.
'4. On a number of occasions prior to the commencement of this suit, plaintiff parked his automobile in truck loading zones on the streets between the hours of 7:00 A.M. and 6:00 P.M. On each occasion, he left his automobile parked in said truck loading zones while making a delivery to an office building. On all of the occasions of the Plaintiff's parking the automobile in the truck loading zone, the automobile did not have attached to it commercial motor vehicle license plates issued by the State of Texas through its agent, the Tax Assessor and Collector of Harris County, Texas. The Plaintiff failed to produce any evidence as to the dates and times of these occurrences.
'5. Upon some of the occasions stated above (the evidence, however, failing to show upon what dates and times) Police Officers of the City of Houston placed upon the automobile traffic violation summonses (commonly known as 'parking tickets') for violation of Section 2247(b). Thereafter, complaints concerning the violations have been filed in the Corporation Court of the City of Houston and Plaintiff required to stand trial on several occasions on these complaints. Again, the evidence does not show how many times or on what dates this has happened.
'6. In both pleading and testimony, Plaintiff admits that he has on every occasion deliberately parked the automobile in the truck zones in contravention of the terms of Section 2247(b).
...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State v. Morales
...did not intend to enlarge such jurisdiction when it promulgated the Declaratory Judgments Act. Stecher v. City of Houston, 272 S.W.2d 925, 928 (Tex.Civ.App.--Galveston 1954, writ ref'd n.r.e.). A civil court simply has no jurisdiction to render naked declarations of "rights, status or other......
-
Walters v. Oklahoma Ethics Com'n
...Inc., 335 S.W.2d 653, 656 (Tex.Civ.App.1960); City of Houston v. Adams, 326 S.W.2d 627, 630 (Tex.Civ.App.1959); Stecher v. City of Houston, 272 S.W.2d 925, 928 (Tex.Civ.App.1954); Chevron Oil Company v. City of El Paso, 537 S.W.2d 472, 474 (Tex.Civ.App.1976); Better Home Products of Texas C......
-
Kahaikupuna v. State, 26850.
...of Life, 340 Mass. 235, 163 N.E.2d 276 (1960) (declaratory relief granted when ongoing business relations affected); Stecher v. Houston, 272 S.W.2d 925 (Tex.Civ.App.1954) (dismissing action for the stated reason that the validity of a criminal statute, without vested property rights involve......
-
Cabell's, Inc. v. City of Nacogdoches
...as is the plaintiff's here, with the resulting items of loss we have discussed above. The defendant city also cites Stecher v. City of Houston, Tex.Civ.App., 272 S.W.2d 925, and Malone v. City of Houston, Tex.Civ.App., 278 S.W.2d 204, by the Galveston Court of Civil Appeals, and State ex re......