Legal Opinion

Anderton v. City of Cedar Hill

Court of Appeals of Texas

Decided August 22, 2014No. 05-12-00969-CVPublishedCited by 16 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

Opinion by Justice BRIDGES.

In this summary judgment proceeding, the City of Cedar Hill (the “City”) filed suit against appellees Patsy B. Anderton and Doyle Anderton, individually and d/b/a A-l Grass Sand and Stone (“the Ander-tons”) regarding the alleged nonconform*87ing use status of property, specifically Lot 5, owned by the Andertons. The trial court granted summary judgment in favor of the City regarding the nonconforming use status of Lot 5. The trial court also dismissed the Andertons’ counterclaim under Texas Local Government Code chapter 245 and determined their inverse…

2Cases cited23 opinions

  1. Nixon v. Mr. Property Management Co.Texas Supreme Court · 1985
  2. Bland Independent School District v. BlueTexas Supreme Court · 2000
  3. Mayhew v. Town of SunnyvaleTexas Supreme Court · 1998
  4. G & H TOWING CO. v. MageeTexas Supreme Court · 2011
  5. Board of Adjustment of the City of San Antonio v. WendeTexas Supreme Court · 2002

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

3Cited by16 opinions

  1. Hardaway v. Lou Eda Korth Stubbs NixonCourt of Appeals of Texas · 2017
  2. FLCT, Ltd. v. City of FriscoCourt of Appeals of Texas · 2016
  3. Rodriguez v. Lockhart Contracting Services, Inc.Court of Appeals of Texas · 2016
  4. Ex parte GarciaCourt of Appeals of Texas · 2017
  5. Unocal Pipeline Company v. BP Pipelines (Alaska) Inc., Conoco Phillips Transportation Alaska, Inc., and ExxonMobil Pipeline Co.Court of Appeals of Texas · 2016

11 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