Opinion

Bounds v. Caudle

  • 21 Tex. Sup. Ct. J. 92
  • 560 S.W.2d 925
  • 1977 Tex. LEXIS 302
Court
Texas Supreme Court
Filed
Nov 30, 1977
Status
Published
On the bench
Barrow
Cited by
78 cases
Authority
More cited than 10.7%

noting that survivors "cannot recover in the suit for wrongful death” if doctrine of interspousal tort immunity would have barred decedent’s personal injury cause of action

How later courts described this case

  • noting that survivors "cannot recover in the suit for wrongful death” if doctrine of interspousal tort immunity would have barred decedent’s personal injury cause of action
  • ''[W]here a plaintiff has been involved in litigation with a third party as a result of the tortious act of another, plaintiff may recover in a separate suit for his reasonable and necessary expenses of the prior litigation. In order that such recovery may be had there are certain requisites prescribed, the first of which is that the present plaintiff ... must have incurred attorney’s fees in the prosecution or the defense of a prior action. Another, the litigation must have involved a third party and not against the defendant .... in the present action.”
  • The court “abolish[ed] the rule established in Nickerson [and Matson v. Nickerson, 65 Tex. 281 (1886)] to the extent that it would bar all claims for wilful or intentional torts.”
  • Rule abrogated as to intentional torts

Written by the judges who cited it.

The opinion

ON MOTION FOR REHEARING

The Caudle children urge that this Court is without jurisdiction to consider Dr. Bounds’ application for writ of error because he failed to file a Motion for Rehearing in connection with the final judgment of the court of civil appeals. See Oil Field Haulers Association v. Railroad Commission of Texas, 381 S.W.2d 183 (Tex.1964). They contend the court of civil appeals rendered a second, final judgment after rendering its original judgment. The argument is without merit, however, because the record shows that only one judgment was entered into the record and that Dr. Bounds timely filed a Motion for Rehearing.

Accordingly, the Caudles’ Motion for Rehearing is overruled. The Motion for Rehearing cited by Dr. Bounds is also overruled. No further Motions for Rehearing will be permitted to be filed in this cause.

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.