Skip to content Skip to sidebar Skip to footer

[Download] "City Dallas Et Al. v. Archie Fifley Et Al." by Dallas No. 16099 Court of Civil Appeals of Texas # eBook PDF Kindle ePub Free

City Dallas Et Al. v. Archie Fifley Et Al.

๐Ÿ“˜ Read Now     ๐Ÿ“ฅ Download


eBook details

  • Title: City Dallas Et Al. v. Archie Fifley Et Al.
  • Author : Dallas No. 16099 Court of Civil Appeals of Texas
  • Release Date : January 29, 1962
  • Genre: Law,Books,Professional & Technical,
  • Pages : * pages
  • Size : 60 KB

Description

ON MOTION FOR REHEARING In his motion for rehearing Appellee, Archie Fifley, contends that since he was never a party before the Board of Adjustment and was not afforded a hearing until the trial in the District Court, that the effect of our opinion is to deprive him of his property without due process of law in violation of the Texas and Federal Constitutions. There is no merit to this contention. The record reveals that prior to the hearing before the Board of Adjustment notice of such hearing was sent to the interested property owners, including appellee Archie Fifley. Fifley, while testifying in the District Court, admitted he received the notice of the hearing before the Board of Adjustment; that upon receipt of such notice he contacted Mr. Wheeler at 7-Eleven Stores, (operated by Southland Corporation) and asked him if it was necessary that he go down to the hearing; that Wheeler told him: ""No, it will not be necessary for you to go""; and that such was the reason he did not appear at the hearing. It is apparent that Fifley's failure to appear before the Board of Adjustment and participate in the hearing was of his own volition and choice and he now cannot be heard to complain that he was not afforded an opportunity to be heard. He has waived any right to make such complaint by his own actions and admissions. Moreover, Fifley's lessee, The Southland Corporation, made the application for the certificate of occupancy and also made the appeal to the Board of Adjustment upon such application being denied by the Building Inspector of the City of Dallas. Thus Fifley's failure to be made a party to such application was a matter of choice between him and his lessee and under the terms of the lease itself Fifley's rights are no greater than that of his lessee, The Southland Corporation.


Free PDF Books "City Dallas Et Al. v. Archie Fifley Et Al." Online ePub Kindle