Court Opinion

ID: 9829022
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-09-01 18:56:01.984973+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:42:56.507665
License: Public Domain

On Rehearing.
In the motion for rehearing it is assigned’ that we erred in the original opinion in the following statement: “,In operating the sew-' erage system, the city is exercising a governmental power.” Supporting this assignment the motion cites City of Pittsburg v. Smith (Tex. Civ. App.) 230 S. W. 1113, and Ostrom v. City of San Antonio, 94 Tex. 523, 62 S. W. 909. We have not made sufficient investiga-; tion to determine certainly whether the statement was erroneous, but the. language was-, unnecessary, 'because the same conclusion would have been reached had we regarded' this power as municipal or proprietary, rather than governmental. We, therefore, withdraw the statement from the opinion. •'
The motion assigns many errors based' upon our omission to find certain facts. We are unable to make any fact findings, because there is no statement of facts in the record. The appeal was from an order sustaining a general demurrer and dismissing the case upon appellants’ declining to amend. In this state of the record we' must assume that every fact allegation of the petition is true and could make no finding contrary thereto. The motion has been considered,but we adEere to the views heretofore expressed and accordingly overrule same.