Legal Opinion

Owens v. Coker

Court of Appeals of Texas

Decided May 30, 1963No. 6651PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

McNEILL, Justice.

Respondents say this court erred in holding the injunction granted was a permanent one. Though the question is not free from doubt, we believe the decision made was correct. The following additional authorities are cited on the question: Riggins v. Thompson, 96 Tex. 154, 71 S.W. 14, holds that the class into which an injunction falls is determined by the judge’s fiat; Ft. Worth Imp. Dist. No. 1 v. City of Ft. Worth, 106 Tex. 148, 158 S.W. 164, 48 L.R.A.,N.S., 994, holds that a judgment granting an injunction is final when it leaves nothing to be further litigated in the case.…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Fort Worth Improvement District No. 1 v. City of Fort WorthTexas Supreme Court · 1913
  2. Riggins v. ThompsonTexas Supreme Court · 1902
  3. Owens v. Texaco, Inc.Court of Appeals of Texas · 1963

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Aloe Vera of America, Inc. v. CIC Cosmetics International Corp.Court of Appeals of Texas · 1974
  2. Zoning Board of Adjustment of Lubbock v. Graham & Associates, Inc., Texas Court of Appeals, 7th District (Amarillo)1983
  3. Caldwell v. KingsberyCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1970
  4. Ralph Williams Gulfgate Chrysler Plymouth, Inc. v. StateCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1969
  5. Wesware, Incorporated v. BlackwellCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1972

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

Powered by the Exa API