Jones v. City of Fort Worth
Texas Commission of Appeals
1Opinion of the CourtPowell, P. J.
Defendant in error, in its motion for rehearing, earnestly and vigorously insists that we erred in our original opinion (267 S. W. 681) in holding that the notice served upon the street commissioner was sufficient compliance with the ordinance requirement in question. We have given careful consideration to this contention, and have concluded that, under the undisputed facts in this record, the notice was sufficient. In order that we may have in mind just what happened in this connection, -we quote the following :. “Fort Worth, Texas. December 16, 1920.
“Commissioner of Streets, City Hall, Fort…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Bowles v. MitchellTexas Commission of Appeals · 1922
- Johnson v. NewberryTexas Supreme Court · 1924
- Jones v. City of Fort WorthTexas Commission of Appeals · 1924
- Powers v. City of BoulderSupreme Court of Colorado · 1913
- City of Fort Worth v. JonesCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1922
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by8 opinions
- Bowman v. RahmoellerSupreme Court of Missouri · 1932
- City of Beaumont v. BakerCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1936
- Mouille v. City of Port ArthurCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1942
- City of Fort Worth v. JonesCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1925
- McLendon v. City of HoustonCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1953
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.