Court Opinion

ID: 9831842
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-09-01 21:24:41.835083+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:43:38.486728
License: Public Domain

On Motion for Rehearing.
While perhaps not altogether clear, we think that under the circumstances of this case, where, on the face of the proceedings, a lien has been fixed on plaintiffs’ property, claimed as a homestead, and there is a threatened issuance of negotiable evidences of such lien, that the remedy of injunction is available under the terms of article 4642, Rev. Statutes of 1925. See the case of Pulte v. Keel (Tex. Civ. App.) 297 S. W. 241, writ of error .refused, where the remedy was applied under somewhat similar circumstances. See, also, Foster v. City of Waco, 113 ,Tex. 352, 255 S. W. 1104.
It seems to us, under the adjudications relating to the subject that the board of aider-men, having appointed the day for a hearing at which the issue of the homestead character of the property was presented, and at which hearing said board had disregarded such issue, ordered the improvement, imposed an assessment lien, and were threatening to issue negotiable evidences thereof which might find their way into the hands of persons claiming to be innocent purchasers, and claiming that the order of the board of aldermen was final, as was originally urged in this case, that injunctive relief is more adequate than that of a suit for damages or of undertaking to resist a suit by some holder of the assessment lien. The lien, as it seems to us, may well be said to cast a cloud, within the meaning of the article of the statutes referred to, upon the title of the homestead owner, which might impede a favorable sale by her.
The motion will accordingly be overruled.