Legal Opinion
McEachern v. Town of Highland Park
Texas Supreme Court
Decided June 30, 1934No. 5945PublishedCited by 17 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtChief Justice Cureton
This is a zoning case, here by writ of error. We refer to the opinion of the Court of Civil Appeals for a statement of the case. 34 S. W. (2d) 676.
The principal question involved is the validity of the zoning ordinance of the City of Highland Park, an incorporated town adjacent to the City of Dallas. The ordinance is a comprehensive one, similar in purpose to the zoning ordinance held valid by us in the case of Lombardo v. City of Dallas, this day decided, ante, p. 1.
It is unnecessary to discuss the validity of the ordinance before us, since it is in its general effect plainly valid under the…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Miller v. Board of Public Works of Los AngelesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1925
- Ware v. City of WichitaSupreme Court of Kansas · 1923
- City of Tucson v. Arizona MortuaryArizona Supreme Court · 1928
- McEachern v. Town of Highland ParkCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1931
3Cited by17 opinions
- Barshop v. Medina County Underground Water Conservation DistrictTexas Supreme Court · 1996
- City of San Antonio v. Pigeonhole Parking of Texas, Inc.Texas Supreme Court · 1958
- Ben Lomond, Inc. v. City of Idaho FallsIdaho Supreme Court · 1968
- Chicago Title & Trust Co. v. Village of PalatineAppellate Court of Illinois · 1959
- Caruthers v. Board of Adjustment of City of Bunker Hill VillageCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1956
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.