Court Opinion

ID: 9774408
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-29 18:19:16.334239+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:32:08.035822
License: Public Domain

ON MOTION FOR REHEARING
Hampton asserts in his motion for rehearing that his “ . . . position in this case, both in the Trial Court and in this Court, has been, and is, that the Collection Ordinance is in direct contravention of the applicable Texas statutes. . . . ” Hamp*742ton contends that the constitutionality of the Collection Ordinance was never at issue, but we hold that if the ordinance is inconsistent with the general laws of this State, it would violate the constitutional prohibition contained in Article 11, Section 5, of the Texas Constitution. Therefore, Hampton’s claim that the ordinance is in contravention of the statutes constitutes an allegation that the ordinance is unconstitutional, and the Attorney General must be served under Section 11 of the Declaratory Judgments Act, Article 2524-1, Tex.Rev. Civ.Stat.Ann. (1965).
The motion for rehearing is overruled.