# State v. Houston & T. C. Ry. Co.

> Court of Appeals of Texas · June 19, 1918 · 209 S.W. 820

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9830077

## Case

- **Full name:** State v. Houston & T. C. Ry. Co.
- **Court:** Court of Appeals of Texas
- **Decided:** June 19, 1918
- **Citations:** 209 S.W. 820; 1918 Tex. App. LEXIS 1409
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Opinion of the court by Lane
- **Judges:** Lane
- **Cited by:** 23 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9830077

## How later opinions describe it (automated extraction)

- noting that counties or other districts have no inherent power to tax, and any taxing authority they do have is conferred upon them solely at the discretion of the Legislature

## Opinion text

LANE, J.
This suit was instituted by 'J. H. Crooker, district attorney, in behalf of the state of Texas, by authority and order of the commissioners’ court of Harris county, against the Houston & Texas Central Railway Company, to recover certain taxes alleged to be due and payable to the county of Harris for the use and benefit of the Harris County Ship Channel Navigation District, which was duly organized by an act of the 31st Legislature of this state (Acts 31st Leg. e. 15), the boundaries of said district being the same as those oí Harris county.
The taxes sought to be collected by this suit are such as were assessed on the full value of the intangible, assets of appellee as were apportioned to Harris county by the state tax board, and the full value of its rolling stock as apportioned to said county by-the comptroller of the state.
Appellant, plaintiff below, contends that such taxes are assessable and collectable for tile use of said Harris county Ship Channel Navigation District, and appellee contends that there is no law authorizing the assessment and collection of such taxes for such purposes.
The cause was tried before the court without a jury upon the issues submitted. After hearing the evidence adduced and argument of counsel, the court rendered judgment for the defendant.
The cause is one of which the trial court had jurisdiction. The judgment rendered is one which the court could have properly rendered upon the record before us.
[1] No brief has been filed in this court by appellant pointing out any error committed in the trial of the cause. There is no fundamental error apparent of record. Wherefore the judgment of the trial court is affirmed.
Affirmed.
<&=For other cases see same topic and KEY-NUMBER in all Key-Numbered Digests and Indexes
<§=^>For other cases see same topic and KEY-NUMBER in all Key-Numbered Digests and Indexes

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9830077. Public record. Not legal advice.