Zarb v. Houston

168 S.W. 877, 1914 Tex. App. LEXIS 1040
CourtCourt of Appeals of Texas
DecidedJune 27, 1914
DocketNo. 5342.
StatusPublished

This text of 168 S.W. 877 (Zarb v. Houston) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Texas primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Zarb v. Houston, 168 S.W. 877, 1914 Tex. App. LEXIS 1040 (Tex. Ct. App. 1914).

Opinion

MOURSUND, J.

This is an appeal from an order made in vacation by Hon. F. G. Chambliss, judge of the Thirty-Sixth judicial district, granting appellees, J. C. Houston and wife, Mrs. Gertie Houston, Henry King, and wife, Mrs. Nora King, a temporary injunction restraining appellant from taking down and removing and from molesting a windmill erected in the Catholic cemetery at Floresville, and from interfering with appel-lees’ use thereof; also from authorizing, permitting, or consenting for any other persons to bury any one upon two certain lots in said cemetery, alleged to be owned by appel-lees, and from selling or otherwise disposing of said lots. The injunction was granted on June 14, 1914, upon plaintiffs’ first amended original petition. On June 19, 1914, an answer was filed, but the same does not appear to have been called to the attention of the judge who granted the injunction, and ap-pellees have filed a motion to strike same *878 from the record,, which is well taken. The appeal is from the order granting the injunction upon the verified petition alone, and this court cannot consider any answer which was not before the trial court when he made the order appealed from. Houston Electric Co. v. Glen Park Co., 155 S. W. 968; Jeff Chaison Townsite Co. v. McFaddin, 56 Tex. Civ. App. 611, 121 S. W. 717; Young v. Dudney, 140 S. W. 802.

We have not been favored by brief or oral argument presenting the contentions relied upon by appellant for a reversal, and upon an examination of the petition we conclude that the allegations show such rights in ap-pellees with respect to the windmill and the lots in said cemetery and such threats on the part of appellant as authorized the granting of the temporary injunction.

The judgment is affirmed.

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

Related

Houston Electric Co. v. Glen Park Co.
155 S.W. 965 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1913)
Jeff Chaison Townsite Co. v. McFaddin, Wiess & Kyle Land Co.
121 S.W. 716 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1909)
Young v. Dudney
140 S.W. 802 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1911)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
168 S.W. 877, 1914 Tex. App. LEXIS 1040, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/zarb-v-houston-texapp-1914.