Legal Opinion
MacK v. Landry
Texas Court of Appeals, 14th District (Houston)
Decided March 2, 2000No. 14-98-00580-CVPublishedCited by 90 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION ON MOTION FOR REHEARING
BILL CANNON, Justice (Assigned).
Appellants (Macks) filed a motion for rehearing of this cause on January 28, 2000. We withdraw our former opinion and judgment dated January 13, 2000, and substitute the following. We write to clarify the issue raised in appellants’ motion. Appellants have asked that a metes and bounds description of the easement be used to describe the easement this court determined to exist in favor of appellees. Appellants have furnished this description which was plaintiffs Exhibit 17 introduced into evidence at trial, and which said metes and…
2Cases cited27 opinions
- Kawasaki Steel Corp. v. MiddletonTexas Supreme Court · 1985
- Davis v. City of San AntonioTexas Supreme Court · 1988
- Drye v. Eagle Rock Ranch, Inc.Texas Supreme Court · 1963
- Sherman v. First National Bank in CenterTexas Supreme Court · 1988
- Middleton v. Kawasaki Steel Corp.Court of Appeals of Texas · 1985
22 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by90 opinions
- Aguero v. Ramirez, Texas Court of Appeals, 13th District2002
- Allen v. AllenCourt of Appeals of Texas · 2008
- Boerschig v. SOUTHWESTERN HOLDINGS, INC., Texas Court of Appeals, 8th District (El Paso)2010
- City of Corpus Christi v. Taylor, Texas Court of Appeals, 13th District2004
- Cleaver v. Cundiff, Texas Court of Appeals, 11th District (Eastland)2006
85 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.