# Hines v. Hash

> Texas Supreme Court · January 27, 1993 · 843 S.W.2d 464

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9759576

## Case

- **Full name:** Dutch HINES, Petitioner, v. C.W. HASH, Jr., Respondent
- **Court:** Texas Supreme Court
- **Decided:** January 27, 1993
- **Citations:** 843 S.W.2d 464; 1992 WL 360699
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Concurrence by Gammage
- **Judges:** Hecht, Doggett, Mauzy, Gammage
- **Cited by:** 222 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/9759576

## How later opinions describe it (automated extraction)

- holding statute's purpose could be assumption. Instead, the Act provides that a complaint must furthered without jurisdictional interpretation of mandatory be filed in time to “permit effective inspection of the plants timing requirement
- explaining that when plaintiff fails to comply with notice requirement under DTPA or Medical Liability and Insurance Improvement Act, abatement of the action for the statutory notice period is appropriate, not dismissal
- concluding "that if a plaintiff files an action for damages under the DTPA without first giving the required notice, and a defendant timely requests an abatement, the trial court must abate the proceedings”
- concluding that the proper remedy is abatement “if a plaintiff files an action for damages under the DTPA without first giving the required notice, and a defendant timely requests an abatement”

## Opinion text

GAMMAGE, Justice,
concurring.
I concur in the opinion and judgment of the court. I do not join in either of the other concurrences accompanying this opinion, nor will I join in any such unfortunate, unnecessary and contentious writings in the future.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9759576. Public record. Not legal advice.