Owens v. Coker
Court of Appeals of Texas
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
- Fort Worth Improvement District No. 1 v. City of Fort WorthTexas Supreme Court · 1913
- Riggins v. ThompsonTexas Supreme Court · 1902
- Owens v. Texaco, Inc.Court of Appeals of Texas · 1963
3Cited by5 opinions
- Aloe Vera of America, Inc. v. CIC Cosmetics International Corp.Court of Appeals of Texas · 1974
- Zoning Board of Adjustment of Lubbock v. Graham & Associates, Inc., Texas Court of Appeals, 7th District (Amarillo)1983
- Caldwell v. KingsberyCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1970
- Ralph Williams Gulfgate Chrysler Plymouth, Inc. v. StateCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1969
- Wesware, Incorporated v. BlackwellCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1972