holding that party asserting right of offset bears burden of pleading offset and proving facts © 2015 Thomson Reuters. No claim to original U.S. Government Works. 18 Triton 88, L.P. v. Star Electricity, L.L.C., 411 S.W.3d 42 (2013) necessary to support it
How later courts described this case
- holding that party asserting right of offset bears burden of pleading offset and proving facts © 2015 Thomson Reuters. No claim to original U.S. Government Works. 18 Triton 88, L.P. v. Star Electricity, L.L.C., 411 S.W.3d 42 (2013) necessary to support it
- holding that the payment of insurance benefits to the plaintiff was not an offsetting benefit because it came from a collateral source
- holding that false, misleading, or deceptive practices occurring before there was a contract for interstate shipment of household goods is not preempted
- holding that, if an objection to jury charge based upon variance between pleadings and proof is not a distinct and specific objection, it is waived
Written by the judges who cited it.
Later courts went against this
Disapproved — as noted by a later court
Transfer & Storage Co., 601 S.W.2d 931 (Tex.1980), these cases are in the minority and two of them have been disapproved.
medium confidence
Distinguished
Distinguished by Wayne Strand Pontiac-GMC, Inc. v. McColskey, 1982 Tex. App. LEXIS 5268 (1982)
The facts in Brown are easily distinguishable from those in the instant case.
The opinion
DISSENTING OPINION IN PART
STEAKLEY, Justice.
I agree with the writing and holding of the Court of Civil Appeals that the collateral source rule does not apply. The issuance of the insurance policy and the payment thereunder were admissible to rebut the amount of damages because the insurance was procured pursuant to the contract between the parties. As pointed out by the Court of Civil Appeals, a fourfold recovery of damages results here from the denial of the general principle forbidding more than one recovery for the same loss. 584 S.W.2d 284 at 291-293 .