Estes v. City of Granbury, 15931

Decision Date09 May 1958
Docket NumberNo. 15931,15931
Citation314 S.W.2d 154
PartiesR. E. ESTES, Appellant, v. CITY OF GRANBURY, Appellee.
CourtTexas Court of Appeals

R. E. Estes, Granbury, for appellant.

Joseph A. Chandler, Stephenville, Dumas, Huguenin & Boothman, and A. B. Huguenin, Dallas, for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

R. E. Estes filed this suit against the City of Granbury seeking to enjoin the City from selling and disposing of certain utility bonds in the sum of $400,000, for the payment of which it is proposed to pledge the combined receipts from the City's electric, sewer and water systems. The court sustained the City's plea in abatement and dismissed the suit.

Appellant alleges that he is a resident citizen of the City of Granbury; that the City Council passed an ordinance and notice of election for the issuance of bonds, said election to be held on September 21, 1957, at which three propositions would be submitted to the qualified voters, namely, (1) whether the City be authorized to issue $160,000 of revenue bonds for the purpose of constructing improvements and extensions to its water works system; (2) whether it be authorized to issue $130,000 of revenue bonds for the purpose of constructing improvements and extensions to its sewer system; and (3) whether it be authorized to issue $110,000 of revenue bonds for the purpose of constructing improvements and extensions to its electric light system; and that the election is null and void and the bonds attempted to be issued are null and void, because the election notice and order, as well as the three propositions voted on, specified that the entire revenues of the water works system, the electric light system, and the sewer system shall be used to pay off and discharge said bonds, when, under the law, the receipts from each separate utility can be expended only for that particular item. There were other allegations about the invalidity of the election and the bonds, which we think it unnecessary to set out in view of our disposition of the appeal.

Appellee filed a plea in abatement, setting up, among other things, that appellant's petition fails to allege that he will or can suffer any injury peculiar to himself individually, and that therefore he has no justiciable or litigable interest in the controversy and no right to maintain the suit. The plea in abatement was sustained.

The bonds were voted under the provisions of Article 1111 et seq., Vernon's Ann. Texas St.,...

To continue reading

Request your trial
3 cases
  • Franks v. Welch, 14569
    • United States
    • Texas Court of Appeals
    • 25 Marzo 1965
    ...S.W.2d 464, no writ hist.; Houston Natural Gas Corp. v. Wyatt, Tex.Civ.App.1962, 359 S.W.2d 257, no writ hist.; Estes v. City of Granbury, Tex.Civ.App.1958, 314 S.W.2d 154, error ref.; Hoff v. Westhoff, Tex.Civ.App.1936, 102 S.W.2d 293, error ref.; and Schenker v. City of San Antonio, Tex.C......
  • Schenker v. City of San Antonio
    • United States
    • Texas Court of Appeals
    • 15 Mayo 1963
    ...guardians of the public interest may maintain actions for the redress of such character of injuries.' See also Estes v. City of Granberry, Tex.Civ.App., 314 S.W.2d 154, wr. ref.; West Tex. Utilities Co. v. Smith, Tex.Civ.App., 168 S.W.2d 665, wr. ref.; Powell v. City of Baird, Tex.Civ.App.,......
  • Houston Natural Gas Corp. v. Wyatt
    • United States
    • Texas Court of Appeals
    • 1 Junio 1962
    ...him to maintain a suit to enjoin its execution when the consideration was payable only from utility revenues. In Estes v. City of Granbury, Tex.Civ.App., 314 S.W.2d 154 (Writ Ref.), it was held that a city taxpayer could not maintain a suit to enjoin issuance of utility bonds by the city wi......

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT