Legal Opinion

O'Neal v. City of Sherman

Texas Supreme Court

Decided May 6, 1890No. 6362PublishedCited by 24 opinions

Appeal from. Grayson. Tried below before Hon. H. 0. Head.

1Opinion of the Court

HOBBY, Judge.

—Appellants, who are husband and wife, sought to *183enjoin the city of Sherman, incorporated under the general incorporation act, and W. 0. Connor and others, who had contracted to furnish said city a system of water works, from boring a large number of wells upon a certain strip of land 50 feet wide and about 1000 feet long, which appellants had conveyed oif their homestead to the said city a few days before “for street purposes and none other,” the deed expressly stipulating that the same rights and no higher should pass to the city than would have been acquired had the city…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Proprietors of Locks & Canals on Merrimack River v. Nashua & Lowell RailroadMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1870
  2. Manny & Co. v. FrenchSupreme Court of Iowa · 1867

3Cited by24 opinions

  1. Humble Oil & Refining Co. v. BlankenburgTexas Supreme Court · 1951
  2. Gladys City Oil, Gas & Manufacturing Co. v. Right of Way Oil Co.Court of Appeals of Texas · 1911
  3. Lyon v. McDonaldTexas Supreme Court · 1890
  4. Fort Worth & D. S. P. Ry. Co. v. JuddCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1928
  5. City of Arlington, Tex. v. Golddust Twins Realty Corp.Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1994

19 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API