Court Opinion

ID: 9830555
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-09-01 20:17:08.495072+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:43:24.264507
License: Public Domain

On Second Motion for Rehearing.
[34] We find that we were in error in determining to certify to the Supreme Court the question of the conflict between this opinion and the Hanks Case, supra, on the subject of the restrictive nature of the lease. Our opinion follows the ruling of the Supreme Court in the Kimball Case, 114 S. W. 668. It was not intended to require the certification of a question already determined by the Supreme Court, although there may be a conflict with the subsequent decision of a Court of Civil Appeals. Yoacham v. McCurdy, 27 Tex. Civ. App. 183, 65 S. W. 213.
[35] We adhere, however, to our former conclusion, that there is a conflict between this case and the Heckerman Case, supra, which necessitates a certification by us of the question in conflict for final adjudication to the Supreme Court.