![]() ![]() The court found as a fact that appellant is "aiding and abetting the defendant, Bill Tufaner, in the operation of the pool hall in question, illegally, and upon its own motion, it should be enjoined from knowingly furnishing, renting, leasing, selling or mortgaging or otherwise conspiring or conniving with said defendant, Bill Tufaner or any other person in Dallas County, for the purpose of knowingly aiding and abetting, in maintaining or operating any pool hall in Dallas County, Texas, in violation * There is no appeal from this part of the judgment. The sheriff of Dallas county was directed to deliver to appellant the property described in the judgment. per annum from the date of judgment, and for title and possession of the property on which appellant had a mortgage. as attorney fee, and allowed interest at the rate of 6 per cent. The court gave appellant judgment against Tufaner for the amount of its debt, in the principal sum of $363.28, with an additional 10 per cent. These parties did not answer in the lower court, have not appealed from the judgment, and it is final as to them. So the case is before this court with no pleading by appellee, asking for any affirmative relief against appellant.Īfter the hearing of the case, the court granted the injunction against Tufaner and against the Little Bill's Billiard Parlor, and permanently enjoined them from operating a pool hall. The court sustained the exception, struck out the trial amendment, and appellee reserved no exception to such ruling. To the trial amendment appellant filed a motion to strike and exceptions, briefly on the ground that a separate and distinct suit could not be alleged by trial amendment. ![]() Appellant prayed that its debt be established and that said property be delivered to it under a provision in the mortgage.Īppellee filed a trial amendment and undertook to make appellant a party defendant to its injunction suit against Bill Tufaner, making allegations to the effect that appellant was guilty of selling or leasing billiard and pool tables, balls, and cues and other paraphernalia, to enable such persons to violate the law against the operation of pool halls, and did sell such property for such purpose to Tufaner, and prayed for an injunction against appellant to prevent such sales. additional as attorney fees, in that Tufaner had defaulted in the payment of one of the notes, and, under the terms of the mortgage, appellant had the option to declare the entire indebtedness due, and also that Tufaner had violated the terms of the mortgage, in that he had put such property to an illegal use, contrary to a valid covenant in the mortgage. Such petition further shows that the debt had matured, together with 10 per cent. The petition in intervention shows that said property had been seized by the sheriff under order of the court, and was held by such sheriff. Before the day set for hearing, appellant, Brunswick-Balke-Collender Company, intervened in the suit and showed by pertinent allegations that it was the owner of an indebtedness against Bill Tufaner in an amount evidenced by six promissory notes representing the purchase price of the pool and billiard tables, cues, balls, and other paraphernalia necessary for the operation of a pool and billiard parlor, and that Tufaner, at the time he purchased said property from appellant, executed a valid and subsisting mortgage in appellant's favor on such property to secure such indebtedness. The petition was duly verified and a temporary restraining order was issued, ex parte, restraining the owner and all of those interested therein from operating a pool hall or billiard hall at such place until a named date, when the parties named as defendants were required to answer the suit. Hurt, criminal district attorney of Dallas county, against Little Bill's Billiard Parlor and Bill Tufaner, individually, in which it is alleged that Tufaner is owner and operator of Little Bill's Billiard Parlor at 1618 North Fitzhugh street in the city of Dallas, and that such business is operated in violation of law.Īppellee's petition made all of the allegations of fact necessary for the issuance of a writ of injunction, enjoining the unlawful operation of such business, under the provisions of article 4668, R.S. ![]() This is an injunction suit instituted by appellee, the state of Texas, through Robert L.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |