Loving v. Clem
Court of Appeals of Texas
1DissentVaughan, J.
Not being able to agree to the construction given by the majority opinion to the language contained in the deeds to appellees, viz. “It is fully understood and agreed that at any time any of the above conditions, so far as they affect the property on Gaston Avenue between Paulus and Nesbitt streets, may be amended by a vote of three-fourths of the owners on said street voting according to the front foot holdings, each front foot counting as one vote,” and the disposition of the appeal being made thereon, I am impelled from a sense of duty to express my views in reference thereto. I wish to…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Couch v. Southern Methodist UniversityTexas Commission of Appeals · 1928
- Harris v. RorabackMichigan Supreme Court · 1904
- Seeley v. Phi Sigma Delta House Corp.Michigan Supreme Court · 1928
- Green v. GernerCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1926
- Elterich v. Leicht Real Estate Co.Supreme Court of Virginia · 1921
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.