Knioum v. Slattery
Court of Appeals of Texas
1Opinion of the Court
NORVELL, Justice.
This cause purports to be a class action brought under Rule 42, R.C.P. W. 0. Slat-tery sued to annul certain restrictive covenants applicable to the Ebony Acres addi-' tion to Corpus Christi, Texas. He is ap-pellee here, but will be referred to as plaintiff in this opinion, in accordance with his position in the trial court. Slattery designated only two defendants by name in his petition, A. H. Vinson and Louis Michelson. These .parties will be referred to as the “named defendants.” W. R. Knioum and others, although not named in the petition, filed answers and will be…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Hansberry v. LeeSupreme Court of the United States · 1940
- Veal v. ThomasonTexas Supreme Court · 1942
- Fischer v. Rio Tire Co.Texas Commission of Appeals · 1933
- Cook v. PollardTexas Supreme Court · 1888
- Matthews v. Landowners Oil Ass'nCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1947
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by12 opinions
- Clyde Austin v. Texas-Ohio Gas CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1955
- Ball v. Farm & Home Savings Ass'nCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1988
- Ambassador Oil Corporation v. RobertsonCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1964
- O.D. Stroud v. Stroud, Texas Court of Appeals, 5th District (Dallas)1987
- Meyer v. WICHITA COUNTY WATER IMP. DISTS. NOS. 1 AND 2Court of Appeals of Texas · 1954
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.