Legal Opinion

City of Austin v. Quick

Texas Court of Appeals, 3rd District (Austin)

Decided November 6, 1996No. 03-95-00164-CVPublishedCited by 73 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

CARROLL, Chief Justice.

Appellees sued appellant City of Austin (the “City”), challenging the validity of the water pollution control measure known as the Save our Springs Ordinance (the “Ordinance”). Appellants/Intervenors Save Our Springs Legal Defense Fund, Inc. and Al St. Louis (collectively, the “Coalition”) unsuccessfully attempted to intervene in the suit. The trial court submitted certain issues to the jury and, after making certain conclusions of law, rendered judgment striking down the Ordinance as invalid. We will affirm the trial court’s judgment, as modified, in part, and will…

2Cases cited42 opinions

  1. Cameron v. Terrell & Garrett, Inc.Texas Supreme Court · 1981
  2. Prentis v. Atlantic Coast Line Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1908
  3. Guaranty Federal Savings Bank v. Horseshoe Operating Co.Texas Supreme Court · 1990
  4. City of Trenton v. New JerseySupreme Court of the United States · 1923
  5. Williams v. Mayor of BaltimoreSupreme Court of the United States · 1933

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

3Cited by73 opinions

  1. Quick v. City of AustinTexas Supreme Court · 1999
  2. Gables Realty Ltd. Partnership v. Travis Central Appraisal District, Texas Court of Appeals, 3rd District (Austin)2002
  3. Texas Health Care Information Council v. Seton Health Plan, Inc., Texas Court of Appeals, 3rd District (Austin)2002
  4. Texas Department of Insurance v. American Home Assurance Co., Texas Court of Appeals, 3rd District (Austin)1999
  5. Upjohn Co. v. Rylander, Texas Court of Appeals, 3rd District (Austin)2000

68 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