Hunt v. City of San Antonio

462 S.W.2d 536, 14 Tex. Sup. Ct. J. 221, 1971 Tex. LEXIS 270
CourtTexas Supreme Court
DecidedFebruary 3, 1971
DocketB-2407
StatusPublished
Cited by63 cases

This text of 462 S.W.2d 536 (Hunt v. City of San Antonio) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Texas Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Hunt v. City of San Antonio, 462 S.W.2d 536, 14 Tex. Sup. Ct. J. 221, 1971 Tex. LEXIS 270 (Tex. 1971).

Opinion

McGEE, Justice.

Plaintiff brought this action against the City of San Antonio to have the City’s Ordinance No. 33259, amending the City’s Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance by rezoning Lots 1 and ,2, Block 8, New City Block 3264 from “A-Single Family Dwellings” to “D-Apartments,” declared null and void, and for a permanent injunction enjoining the City from granting any permit for the construction on or the use of said lots other than as allowed in an “A” zone. The trial court rendered judgment for plaintiff. The Court of Civil Appeals reversed and rendered judgment for the defendant. 458 S.W.2d 952. We reverse the judgment of the Court of Civil Appeals and affirm the judgment of the trial court.

This case grew out of the second attempt in recent years to have the two lots in question rezoned. The lots, now vacant, are located on the southeast corner of the intersection of San Pedro Avenue and *538 West Summit Street. Piaintiff owns a home in the immediate vicinity of the lots, across Summit and down the street a few houses. (See plat). The San Antonio Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance was enacted in 1938. The block containing the lots in question (3264), as well as the blocks to the north (3263), northeast (3260), east (3261) and southeast (3059), were all zoned for “A” use. The only non-conforming use in this “A” zone was and is a small apartment house located on the northeast corner of the intersection of San Pedro and Summit, directly north of *539 the lots in question. It was in existence at the time the 1938 ordinance was passed and thus is a prior non-conforming- use.

*538

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

The City of Baytown v. Jovita Lopez
Court of Appeals of Texas, 2024
Lamar Corp. v. City of Longview
270 S.W.3d 609 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 2008)
Save Our Springs Alliance v. City of Austin
149 S.W.3d 674 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 2004)
Ruben Espronceda v. City of San Antonio
Court of Appeals of Texas, 2003
Eller Media Co. v. City of Houston
101 S.W.3d 668 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 2003)
Eller Media Company v. City of Houston, Texas
Court of Appeals of Texas, 2003
Pearce v. City of Round Rock
78 S.W.3d 642 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 2002)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
462 S.W.2d 536, 14 Tex. Sup. Ct. J. 221, 1971 Tex. LEXIS 270, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hunt-v-city-of-san-antonio-tex-1971.