Court Opinion

ID: 9830327
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-09-01 20:06:51.678162+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:43:19.300204
License: Public Domain

On Motion for Rehearing.
Appellant Beard has filed a motion for rehearing of motion No. 8119, suggesting that his case was not a companion case to the Rayburn Case; that the 30-day restraining order after final judgment was not requested nor granted in his case; and that the agreed stipulation between counsel and the trial court, with respect to considering all interlocutory restraining orders as temporary restraining orders, did not relate to his case. Even so, the fiats of the trial judge clearly show that he intended to issue only temporary restraining orders as distinguished from temporary injunctions. The order of March 12, 1934, continued in force “until April 12, 1934, and beyond said date if this cause is not tried before then, until this cause shall have been finally heard and disposed of.” The order of January 2, 1935, interpreted this March order as “the temporary restraining order heretofore granted,” and continued it in “force and effect until this case is heard on its merits.” Manifestly, this language of the fiats can only be interpreted to mean that the trial court intended to issue temporary restraining orders to be in force and effect only “until this case is heard on its merits.”
The motion is overruled.