Legal Opinion

Mitchell v. Dixon

Court of Appeals of Texas

Decided April 3, 1942No. 13190PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

LOONEY, Justice.

This is a mandamus suit. E. B. Dixon, E. R. Dowlen and E. L. Vickery, relators, sought a writ of mandamus to compel the City of McKinney and its governing body, respondents herein, to appoint a board for the examination of plumbers, in obedience to the mandatory provisions of Articles 1076-1081, R.C.S., and/or of an ordinance of said City, adopted on August 17, 1937. Respondents’ demurrers to relators’ petition having been overruled, the cause was submitted on the pleadings and agreed facts, resulting in a decree commanding respondents to appoint a board for the examination of…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Robinson v. City of GalvestonCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1908
  2. Parrish v. WrightCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1927
  3. Caven v. ColemanTexas Supreme Court · 1907
  4. Trewitt v. City of DallasCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1922
  5. Marr v. ReynoldsCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1941

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Mitchell v. DixonTexas Commission of Appeals · 1943
  2. Mitchell v. DixonTexas Supreme Court · 1943

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

Powered by the Exa API