Legal Opinion

G., H. S.A. Ry. Co. v. Degroff

Texas Supreme Court

Decided April 28, 1909No. 1934PublishedCited by 46 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

We adopt the statement of the pleadings and the result of the trial made by the Honorable Court of Civil Appeals as follows:

"Defendants in error, who will hereinafter be called plaintiffs, sued plaintiff in error, who will hereinafter be called defendant, for an injunction to restrain defendant from using that part of Main Street, in the city of El Paso, lying between the east line of Mesa Avenue and the east line of Kansas Street for yard and station purposes, and from switching cars, making up trains, and doing like things on said street within the limits mentioned.
"As grounds for the…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Duck v. PeelerTexas Supreme Court · 1889
  2. Sheldon v. RockwellWisconsin Supreme Court · 1859
  3. Clifton Iron Co. v. DyeSupreme Court of Alabama · 1888
  4. Brunswick & Western Railroad v. Hardey & Co.Supreme Court of Georgia · 1901
  5. Wees v. Coal & Iron Railway Co.West Virginia Supreme Court · 1903

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

3Cited by46 opinions

  1. Spence v. FenchlerTexas Supreme Court · 1915
  2. Hill v. BrownTexas Commission of Appeals · 1922
  3. Hindman v. Texas Lime CompanyTexas Supreme Court · 1957
  4. Humphreys Oil Co. v. LilesTexas Commission of Appeals · 1925
  5. American Const. Co. v. CaswellCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1911

41 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