Enid, O. & W. Ry. Co. v. State
Court of Appeals of Texas
Appeal from District Court, Travis County; Chas. A. Wilcox, Judge. Action by the State of Texas against the Enid, Ochiltree & Western Railway Company and others. From a judgment for plaintiff, defendants appeal. This is a suit by the state of Texas to perpetually enjoin the appellants from taking up and removing the ties and rails on the Enid, Ochiltree & Western railroad, from Dalhart, in Hartley county, Tex., to Wilcoe in said county, a distance of about 13 miles.
Read the full summary
Appeal from District Court, Travis County; Chas. A. Wilcox, Judge. Action by the State of Texas against the Enid, Ochiltree & Western Railway Company and others. From a judgment for plaintiff, defendants appeal. This is a suit by the state of Texas to perpetually enjoin the appellants from taking up and removing the ties and rails on the Enid, Ochiltree & Western railroad, from Dalhart, in Hartley county, Tex., to Wilcoe in said county, a distance of about 13 miles. The case was tried before the court upon an agreed statement of facts, and judgment was rendered for the appellee. From said…
1Opinion of the Court
* Application for writ of error pending in Supreme Court. Article 6625, R.S., in reference to "new corporations in case of sale," provides for the formation of new corporations "for the purpose of acquiring, owning, maintaining and operating `sold-out'" railroads, from which article we make the following excerpt: "Nor shall the main track of any railroad once constructed and operated be abandoned or moved." This is but declarative of the common law. State v. Sugarland Railway Co.,163 S.W. 1047. As the sold-out company is not threatening to remove its ties and rails, and as the appellants have…
2Cases cited18 opinions
- Smyth v. AmesSupreme Court of the United States · 1898
- Smyth v. Ames; Smyth v. Smith; Smyth v. HigginsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1898
- Chicago, Milwaukee & St. Paul Railway Co. v. MinnesotaSupreme Court of the United States · 1890
- Covington & Lexington Turnpike Road Co. v. SandfordSupreme Court of the United States · 1896
- Lake Shore & Michigan Southern Railway Co. v. SmithSupreme Court of the United States · 1899
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- State v. Enid, Ochiltree & Western Railway Co.Texas Supreme Court · 1917
- Texas v. Eastern Texas R.District Court, W.D. Texas · 1922