Bahn v. Savage

6 Citing cases

  1. Bahn v. Savage

    132 Tex. 113 (Tex. 1938)   Cited 1 times

    Upon hearing, the special judge held that the trial court was without jurisdiction and dismissed the proceeding. The Court of Civil Appeals affirmed that judgment and overruled the contention that the election of said special judge was invalid and that the judgment rendered by him was void ( 120 S.W.2d 644), and plaintiffs have brought error to the Supreme Court. Application for writ of error is refused.

  2. Bell v. Harrison

    550 S.W.2d 369 (Tex. Civ. App. 1977)

    Since election contests are matters of public interest and the procedure is entirely statutory, service in the manner prescribed by the statute has been held to be jurisdictional and not subject to waiver. Landrum v. Centennial Rural High School District, 134 S.W.2d 353, 354 (Tex.Civ.App. Austin 1939, writ dism'd jdgmt cor.); Bahn v. Savage, 120 S.W.2d 644, 647 (Tex.Civ.App. San Antonio 1938) writ of error ref'd 132 Tex. 113, 122 S.W.2d 191 (1938) (this point not presented on application); Adamson v. Connally, 112 S.W.2d 287, 289 (Tex.Civ.App. Eastland 1937, no writ). The election in question was held on April 3, 1976. At that time and until April 26, the acting mayor was the Honorable Adlene Harrison. Mayor Harrison appeared as a witness and testified that she was not out of the city at any time in April 1976 and was at City Hall every day except Sunday.

  3. McCasland v. Steele

    496 S.W.2d 937 (Tex. Civ. App. 1973)   Cited 3 times

    We agree with Appellants that the mailing of the petition to the District Attorney by the Contestants by certified mail was insufficient to meet the requirements of Article 9.03. Bahn v. Savage (Tex.Civ.App., San Antonio CA 1938), 120 S.W.2d 644, writ refused by the Supreme Court in, 132 Tex. 113, 122 S.W.2d 191. However, this was surplusage and was apparently done by Contestants out of an abundance of caution.

  4. Rawson v. Brownsboro Independent School Dist.

    263 S.W.2d 578 (Tex. Civ. App. 1953)   Cited 17 times

    We think also that appellants may not in this kind of a suit and after the lapse of more than eight months, attack the validity of the bond election of July 19, 1952. Arts. 9.03, 9.30, 9.31, 9.36, Election Code, V.R.C.S.; Bahn v. Savage, Tex.Civ.App., 120 S.W.2d 644 (writ ref.); Treaccar v. City of Galveston, Tex.Civ.App., 28 S.W.2d 276 (dis.); Barker v. Wilson, Tex.Civ.App., 205 S.W. 543; Moore v. Commissioners' Court, etc., Tex.Civ.App., 192 S.W. 805.

  5. Yoakum County Gas Co. v. Dudley

    231 S.W.2d 997 (Tex. Civ. App. 1950)   Cited 1 times

    The contestant, however, contends that a serving of the notice and statement of grounds by registered mail are sufficient compliance with the statutes and that the trial court erred in holding otherwise. The case of Bahn v. Savage, 120 S.W.2d 644, 646, by the San Antonio Court of Civil Appeals, is similar in many respects to the case before us. In the Bahn case all the contestees, with three exceptions, were served by registered mail with copies of the required notice and statement.

  6. Landrum v. Centennial Rural High School Dist. No. 2

    134 S.W.2d 353 (Tex. Civ. App. 1939)   Cited 12 times

    16 Tex.Jur., ยงยง 121, 122, and 123, pp. 151-158, and cases there cited. See particularly Bahn v. Savage, Tex. Civ. App. 120 S.W.2d 644; Hooker v. Foster, 117 Tex. 237, 1 S.W.2d 276; Treaccar v. Galveston, Tex. Civ. App. 28 S.W.2d 276; Norton v. Alexander, 28 Tex. Civ. App. 466, 67 S.W. 787; Thurston v. Thomas, Tex. Civ. App. 7 S.W.2d 105; Rister v. Plowman, Tex. Civ. App. 98 S.W.2d 264; Barker v. Wilson, Tex. Civ. App. 205 S.W. 543; Garitty v. Halbert, Tex. Civ. App. 235 S.W. 231. The mere fact that the attorney for the trustees, or the trustees obtained a copy of the petition setting forth the grounds of contest will not suffice as written notice of contestants' notice of their intention to contest the election.