Case law

Fairfield Insurance Co. v. Stephens Martin Paving, LP

51 Tex. Sup. Ct. J. 491 · Texas Supreme Court · Feb 15, 2008

Rather clearly, insuring against punitive damages impairs their purpose. B The next question is whether insuring against punitive damages is consistent with the manner in which they are assessed. … TEXAS DEP'T OF INS., 2005 TEXAS LIABILITY INSURANCE CLOSED CLAIM REPORT 2, 5-6, 17 (2005). [59] For example, the Texas Tort Claims Act does not waive governmental immunity from punitive damages, TEX.CIV.PRAC. & REM.CODE §

City of San Antonio v. Texas Water Commission

10 Tex. Sup. Ct. J. 66 · Texas Supreme Court · Oct 26, 1966

We hold that San Antonio qualifies, within the meaning of Section 12, as a “person affected” by the Commission’s order granting GBRA’s application and permit. … The statute clearly authorizes GBRA to apply to the Commission for a permit to appropriate water for municipal purposes and to sell such water if the permit is granted, to municipal corporations.

Mellon Mortgage Co. v. Holder

5 S.W.3d 654 · Texas Supreme Court · Dec 2, 1999

The court of appeals affirmed the summary judgment in favor of the City on the basis of sovereign immunity. … Situations clearly exist "where a trespass has been tolerated for such a sufficient period of time that the public believes it has the `permission' of the possessor to use the property." Murphy v.

Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc. v. Havner

40 Tex. Sup. Ct. J. 846 · Texas Supreme Court · Nov 13, 1997

"If ... the association is limited to specific workers and to particular sites and types of disease and there is no association between the work and other modes of dying, then clearly that is a strong argument in favor of … Callahan, Establishment of Causation in Toxic Tort Litigation, 23 Ariz St.

Town of Flower Mound v. Stafford Estates Ltd. Partnership

47 Tex. Sup. Ct. J. 497 · Texas Supreme Court · May 7, 2004

Clearly, the cited examples of routine regulatory requirements do not come close to the exaction imposed by the Town in this case. There may be other requirements that do. … any State or Territory or the District of Columbia, subjects, or causes to be subjected, any citizen of the United States or other person within the jurisdiction thereof to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities

Centocor, Inc. v. Hamilton

55 Tex. Sup. Ct. J. 774 · Texas Supreme Court · Jun 8, 2012

Hamiltons established fraud by clear and convincing evidence and awarded Patricia $15 million and Thomas $1 million in exemplary damages based on the fraud claim. … Feb. 28, 2007) (not reported) (applying Missouri law) (distinguishing Norplant I and refusing to dismiss all but the plaintiffs failure-to-warn claim because the plaintiff “clearly intend[ed] to pursue claims unrelated to

Citizens Insurance Company of America, Citizens, Inc., Harold Riley, and Mark Oliver v. Dr. Fernando Hakim Daccach, on Behalf of Himself and All Others Similarly Situated

Texas Supreme Court · Mar 2, 2007

Third, Citizens argued that the trial court failed to adequately establish the class certification prerequisites. … Although the contours of the class did not “rest on whether the CICA policies qualify as securities or whether the policies were in fact sold or offered for sale from Texas,” and thus was not invalid as a traditional “fail-safe

Dwayne Uterral Hardeman v. State

Texas Supreme Court · Jun 27, 2017

Collectively, these cases establish the following standards. 1. … Therefore, the exhibits did not qualify as a recorded recollection exception to the hearsay rule and the trial court abused its discretion in admitting them.

Katy Springs & Manufacturing, Inc. v. Joseph Favalora

Texas Supreme Court · Aug 27, 2015

Duty & Breach In order to establish negligence, the plaintiff must produce evidence to establish the existence of a duty and a breach of that duty. Lee Lewis Constr., Inc. v. … To establish proximate cause, the plaintiff must prove foreseeability and cause in fact. Id.

Romero v. KPH Consolidation, Inc.

48 Tex. Sup. Ct. J. 752 · Texas Supreme Court · May 27, 2005

Clearly, the privilege's purposes were not served in this case. As the Court notes, during Dr. Baker's initial credentialing and while he maintained privileges at the Hospital before Mr. … from any act, statement, determination or recommendation made ... without malice, in the course of medical peer review.") & (c) ("A ... health care entity that, without malice, participates in medical peer review ... is immune

PNS Stores, Inc. v. Rene Munguia

Texas Supreme Court · Dec 22, 2015

challenge, we consider and weigh all the evidence in a neutral light and will set aside the finding only if the evidence is so weak or the finding is so against the great weight and preponderance of the evidence that it is clearly … Further, PNS Stores argues that the size of the verdict alone establishes prejudice and passion as a matter of law because it is “so flagrantly excessive that it cannot be accounted for on any other ground.”

Moore v. Lillebo

29 Tex. Sup. Ct. J. 513 · Texas Supreme Court · Jul 9, 1986

Moore and Theaker contend that a family relationship establishes some evidence of mental anguish in the surviving family members when one of the family dies. We agree. … The charge should also clearly instruct the jury not to include damages for mental anguish in loss of society and companionship, and vice versa.

Bandy v. FIRST STATE BANK, OVERTON, TEX.

835 S.W.2d 609 · Texas Supreme Court · Sep 9, 1992

However, Bandy has not established that the temporary administratrices' actions were void. … Liberty Natl Bank, 170 Okl. 207 , 39 P.2d 127, 130 (1934), although in Kasparek the record clearly showed the estate was insolvent. In Convery v.

In Re JFC

96 S.W.3d 256 · Texas Supreme Court · Dec 31, 2002

Finally, the parents contend that one witness, Jasmine Khan, gave an expert opinion when she was not qualified to do so. Counsel for the parents objected on this basis. … The State can hardly say that it was "surprised" to find that the jury charge did not contain the elements that the statute clearly requires it to prove.

Halepeska v. Callihan Interests, Inc.

6 Tex. Sup. Ct. J. 644 · Texas Supreme Court · Jul 31, 1963

They established what they called an independent geological consulting firm known as “Halepeska and Vaughn.” … In the Wood case, this Court clearly said that for the volenti defense to-control, it must be shown that the plaintiff actually knew and appreciated the danger and encountered the risk as the result of an *381 intelligent

San Antonio & Aransas Pass Railway Co. v. Blair

108 Tex. 434 · Texas Supreme Court · Jun 27, 1917

“No citizen of this State shall be deprived of life', liberty, property, privileges or immunities, or in any manner disfranchised, except by the due course of the law of the land.” Sec. 19, art. 1. … This view is very clearly explained by Kent, C. J., in Tillotson v.

GMC v. Saenz on Behalf of Saenz

873 S.W.2d 353 · Texas Supreme Court · May 11, 1994

To the contrary, the evidence establishes that the warning did give reasonable notice. … Consequently, the inadequacy of the warning label must be taken as an established fact.

Marcus Cable Associates, L.P. v. Krohn

46 Tex. Sup. Ct. J. 167 · Texas Supreme Court · Nov 5, 2002

Now if one were to stick just to the words, the answer would clearly be yes. A television cable is a "line". … Clearly, yes.

Debra C. Gunn, M.D., Obstetrical and Gynecological Associates, P.A., and Obstetrical and Gynecological Associates P.L.L.C. v. Andre McCoy, as Permanent Guardian of Shannon Miles McCoy, an Incapacitated Person

Texas Supreme Court · Jun 15, 2018

To testify as an expert, a witness must be qualified, and the proposed testimony must be relevant to the issues in the case and based upon a reliable foundation. TEX. R. EVID. 702; Robinson, 923 S.W.2d at 556. … The two options were clearly presented to the jury. Both plans accounted for a twenty-year life expectancy. Dr.

In Re Allcat Claims Service, L.P. and John Weakly

55 Tex. Sup. Ct. J. 103 · Texas Supreme Court · Nov 28, 2011

To qualify as a “mandamus” ease, there must already exist, at the time of filing, a ministerial duty that the petitioner wants enforced. … So when the Legislature chose to act, it clearly knew it had the authority to create this rule.