finding that the trial court clearly ruled at a pretrial hearing that none of appellant’s exhibits would be admitted at trial and announcing the ruling on the record was sufficient to preserve appellate review
How later courts described this case
- finding that the trial court clearly ruled at a pretrial hearing that none of appellant’s exhibits would be admitted at trial and announcing the ruling on the record was sufficient to preserve appellate review
- holding no need to decide whether trial court abused its discretion by allowing leading questions; appellant could not show harm because the testimony elicited through leading questions was cumulative of other, properly admitted evidence
- stating appellate court must uphold trial court’s evidentiary ruling “if there is any legitimate basis for the ruling” and will not reverse erroneous evidentiary ruling unless error probably caused rendition of improper judgment
- providing that "[n]o judgment may be reversed on appeal on the *898 ground that the trial court made an error of law unless the court of appeals concludes that the error complained of ... probably caused the rendition of an improper judgment”
Written by the judges who cited it.
The opinion
OWEN, Justice,
concurring in the judgment.
I concur in the judgment. It is unnecessary for the Court to decide whether evidence of pending and future claims or evidence of unpaid punitive damages awards is ever admissible. See at 54 (Hecht, J., concurring). Because those questions should be decided if and when they are squarely presented and fully briefed, I do not join in the Court’s opinion or either of my concurring colleagues’ opinions.