Lawyers' Reports Annotated Volume 3

Lawyers' Reports Annotated Volume 3

By (author) 

List price: US$101.74

Currently unavailable

Add to wishlist

AbeBooks may have this title (opens in new window).

Try AbeBooks

Description

This historic book may have numerous typos and missing text. Purchasers can download a free scanned copy of the original book (without typos) from the publisher. Not indexed. Not illustrated. 1906 edition. Excerpt: ...the issuance of such writ. We have heretofore seen that it is not violative of the Constitution in depriving a person of the right of trial by jury. Nor can it be said that it is not due course of law. There is nothing in our Constitution outlining or even suggesting any system of equity jurisprudence, so it was left entirely within the province of the legislature to say what equitable powers it would give the courts. If it be conceded that the effect of the act in question is to restrain the commission of crime, still, there being nothing in the Constitution preventing the legislature from doing this, they had authority to so legislate. In State v. Goodnight," 70 Tex. 682, 11 8. W. 119, our supreme court had this question under review. That was a case where appellee, Goodnight, had inclosed with a fence, school land belonging to the state, and an injunction was granted in the suit requiring him to remove said fence from around said public lands. Among other things, that court said: "But it is insisted, in the brief of counsel for appellee, that the state has a plain, adequate, and complete remedy, without resorting to the writ of injunction. We understand it to be claimed, in the first place, that because the act of February 7, 1884, makes the inclosure of the public lands a penal offense, and provides for the prosecution and punishment of offenders against it, that therefore a court of equity will not interfere. But this proposition cannot be maintained. Public nuisances were indictable at common law, and yet were always subjected to be enjoined." It is further held in that case, because appellant had the action of trespass to try title, which was a legal remedy, that the same was not adequate, but that the writ of injunction was...show more

Product details

  • Paperback | 990 pages
  • 189 x 246 x 50mm | 1,728g
  • Rarebooksclub.com
  • Miami Fl, United States
  • English
  • black & white illustrations
  • 1236505255
  • 9781236505255