Houston & Texas Central Railroad v. Texas
Supreme Court of the United States
ERROR TO THE COURT OF CIVIL APPEALS FOR THE THIRD SUPREME JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF THE STATE OF TEXAS. This proceeding was commenced by the State of Texas against the defendant, the Houston and Texas Central Railroad Company, (hereafter called the company,) to recover the amount ‘due on certain bonds issued to the State, and to foreclose the lien which existed upon its property as security for the payment of such bonds.
Read the full summary
ERROR TO THE COURT OF CIVIL APPEALS FOR THE THIRD SUPREME JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF THE STATE OF TEXAS. This proceeding was commenced by the State of Texas against the defendant, the Houston and Texas Central Railroad Company, (hereafter called the company,) to recover the amount ‘due on certain bonds issued to the State, and to foreclose the lien which existed upon its property as security for the payment of such bonds. The company is the legal successor of the two companies-which received the loans and gave their bonds, and no question of liability arises on that ground. Judgment was given in…
1Opinion of the CourtJustice Peckiiam
The motion to dismiss the writ of error must be denied. The case involves a Federal question under the contract clause of the Constitution.
The claim on the part of the defendant in error, the plaintiff below, is that the state court decided the case under the provisions of the state constitution only, and without.reference to the act of 1870, which the plaintiff in error (the railroad company) alléges to be an impairment of the contract set up by it in the pleadings. Although the state court held that the payments in dispute were made by means of state treasury warrants issued to circulate as…
2Cases cited22 opinions
- Tennessee v. Union & Planters' BankSupreme Court of the United States · 1894
- Poindexter v. GreenhowSupreme Court of the United States · 1885
- Hitchcock v. GalvestonSupreme Court of the United States · 1878
- McCullough v. VirginiaSupreme Court of the United States · 1898
- New Orleans Waterworks Co. v. Louisiana Sugar Refining Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1888
17 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by28 opinions
- Louisville & Nashville Railroad v. MottleySupreme Court of the United States · 1908
- Doucette v. VincentCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1952
- Tidal Oil Co. v. FlanaganSupreme Court of the United States · 1924
- St. Paul Gas Light Co. v. St. PaulSupreme Court of the United States · 1901
- State Ex Rel. Richards v. MoorerSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1929
23 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.