TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

Corona v. Garrison

Fernando Corona v. Homer Garrison, Jr. and Charles Windberg, Jr.

Corona v. Garrison, 274 S.W.2d 541 (Tex. 1955)
Download
Format
Include

Star paging (*137) is kept for pin cites.

Court
Texas Supreme Court · State Highest Courts
Decided
January 19, 1955
Docket
No. A-4942
Judges
Wilson
Citations
274 S.W.2d 541154 Tex. 1241955 Tex. LEXIS 563

Opinion — Wilson

Mr. Justice Wilson delivered the opinion of the Court.

This is a direct appeal from a district court judgment denying a request for an injunction to halt a proceeding in the justice court. The justice court case was initiated by the Department of Public Safety under Section 22 of Article 6687-b for the purpose of obtaining an affirmative finding that appellant is a habitual violator of the traffic laws.

Our jurisdiction on direct appeal in this type of case under Art. 1738a, V.A.C.S., and under Section 3-b of Article V of the Texas Constitution is limited to appeals “from any order of any trial court granting or denying interlocutory or permanent injunction on the grounds of the constitutionality or unconstitutionality of any statute of this state.” Boston v. Garrison, 152 Texas 253 , 256 S.W. 2d 67 .

Appellant seeks to sustain his direct appeal here on the ground that he questions the constitutionality of Section 22, Article 6687-b, V.A.C.S.

The trial court’s judgment reflects that the injunction was denied because “the defendant has suffered no injuries at this time” and because the defendant “has a proper and adequate remedy at law.”

The trial court, in denying the injunction, did not pass upon the constitutionality of the statute and for that reason we have no jurisdiction of this direct appeal. Appellee’s motion to dismiss for want of jurisdiction is granted. Costs are taxed against appellant.

Opinion delivered January 19, 1955.

How later courts describe this case

No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.

1956: 11960: 21961: 11974: 12013: 12015: 119562026peak 1960 · 2

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. Episcopal Diocese of Fort Worth v. Episcopal Church422 S.W.3d 646 (Tex. 2013) · Dissent
  2. In re George Green and Garlan GreenNo. 03-14-00725-CV (Tex. App.—Austin Feb. 23, 2015)
  3. Bryson v. High Plains Underground Water Conservation District No. One297 S.W.2d 117 (Tex. 1956)
  4. Mitchell v. Purolator Security, Inc.515 S.W.2d 101 (Tex. 1974)
  5. Gardner v. Railroad Commission333 S.W.2d 585 (Tex. 1960)
  6. Gibraltar Savings Association v. Falkner351 S.W.2d 534 (Tex. 1961)

Most recent

  1. In re George Green and Garlan GreenNo. 03-14-00725-CV (Tex. App.—Austin Feb. 23, 2015)
  2. Episcopal Diocese of Fort Worth v. Episcopal Church422 S.W.3d 646 (Tex. 2013) · Dissent
  3. Mitchell v. Purolator Security, Inc.515 S.W.2d 101 (Tex. 1974)
  4. Gibraltar Savings Association v. Falkner351 S.W.2d 534 (Tex. 1961)
  5. Standard Securities Service Corporation v. King341 S.W.2d 423 (Tex. 1960)
  6. Gardner v. Railroad Commission333 S.W.2d 585 (Tex. 1960)

Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.

Authorities cited 1

DepthCaseCited by
Boston v. Garrison, 256 S.W.2d 67 (Tex. 1953) 60

Keyboard shortcuts

/Focus the search box
j kNext / previous result
EnterOpen the selected result
xAdd / remove the selected result from the download list
n pNext / previous search term in a case
cCopy the citation of the current case
+ −Larger / smaller reading text
?Show this list