Case ID: tex_159/html/0436-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PER CURIAM:", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

City of San Antonio v. Herlinda Rodriguez Munoz.
    No. A-7138.
    Decided February 25, 1959.
    Rehearing' overruled March 25, 1959.
    (321 S.W. 2d Series 573)
    
      Carlos C. Cadena, City Attorney, and Charles L. Smith, Asst. City Attorney, of San Antonio, for Petitioner.
    
      Anees A. Semaan, Phillip E. Palmer and Morris R. Edwards, all of San Antonio, for respondents.
   PER CURIAM:

Respondent sought from the district court a writ of mandamus to compel the City of San Antonio and certain city officials to issue to respondent, Herlinda Rodriguez Munoz, a “City Retail Dealer’s on Premises Beer License.” The relief sought was denied. Respondents appealed to the Court of Civil Appeals and that court affirmed the judgment of the trial court. 318 S.W. 2d 741. City of San Antonio and its officers have applied for a writ of error.

The case is one in which the Court has potential jurisdiction. Articles 1728 and 1821, Vernon’s Annotated Texas Civil Statutes. But petitioners are not in position to invoke that jurisdiction. Having received in the Court of Civil Appeals all of the relief to which they are entitled, they are not aggrieved by that judgment and therefore cannot show good cause for invoking the jurisdiction of this Court to review it on application for writ of error. Rule 467, Texas Rules of Civil Procedure; Shell Petroleum Corp. v. Grays, 131 Texas 515, 114 S.W. 2d 869; Some Problems of Supreme Court Review, 21 T.B.J. 75, 76. The application is therefore “dismissed for want of jurisdiction.” Rule 483, Texas Rules of Civil Procedure; Shell Petroleum Corp. v. Grays, Supra. We express no opinipn as to the power of the City of San Antonio to require respondent to secure a license from the City as a condition precedent to her right to operate her business in the city.

Opinion delivered February 25, 1959.

Rehearing overruled March 25, 1959.