Legal Opinion

Ray v. Robison

Texas Supreme Court

Decided March 27, 1929No. Motion Nos. 8461, 8462, 8463PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

It is unnecessary to consider the merits of these applications further than to say that since the Commissioner of the General Land Office is not clothed with authority to annul patents, he cannot be compelled by mandamus from the Supreme Court to issue a mineral permit in lands patented to another by the State. Until some court of competent jurisdiction adjudicates the patents to the lands involved in these suits to be void, the Land Commissioner is under no plain, legal duty to grant these permits. Fitzgerald v. Robison, 110 Tex. 468; O'Keefe v. Robison, 116 Tex. 398.

Permission is therefore…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. O'Keefe v. RobisonTexas Supreme Court · 1927
  2. Fitzgerald v. RobisonTexas Supreme Court · 1920

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. State of Texas v. BradfordTexas Supreme Court · 1932
  2. Caples v. WalkerTexas Supreme Court · 1933
  3. Poole v. GilesTexas Supreme Court · 1952
  4. Poole v. GilesTexas Supreme Court · 1952

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

Powered by the Exa API