92 results for 'court:"Texas Supreme Court"'.
J. Blacklock finds that a temporary injunction against enforcement of a Gov. Abbott executive order that prohibited local mask-wearing requirements must be dissolved. The case is remanded for further proceedings consistent with the court's opinion in "Abbott v. Harris County." Vacated.
Court: Texas Supreme Court, Judge: Blacklock, Filed On: June 30, 2023, Case #: 21-1079, Categories: Government, Preemption, Covid-19
Per curiam, the Supreme Court of Texas finds that a temporary injunction against enforcement of a Gov. Abbott executive order that prohibited local mask-wearing requirements must be dissolved. The case is remanded for further proceedings consistent with the court's opinion in "Abbott v. Harris County." Vacated.
Court: Texas Supreme Court, Judge: Per curiam, Filed On: June 30, 2023, Case #: 22-1056, Categories: Government, Covid-19, Injunction
J. Blacklock finds that during a declared disaster, Gov. Greg Abbott has the authority to prohibit local mask mandates issued in response to a contagious disease, including Covid-19. “Rarely in Texas law would a direct conflict between state authority and local authority be resolved in favor of local authority, and the statutes at issue do not dictate such an upside-down result here.” Reversed.
Court: Texas Supreme Court, Judge: Blacklock, Filed On: June 30, 2023, Case #: 22-0124, Categories: Government, Preemption, Covid-19
Per curiam, the Supreme Court of Texas finds that the court of appeals improperly ruled against a home builder in a suit brought by the purchaser of a home who alleges the home was negligently constructed. The builder sought to compel arbitration in the case, which the lower courts denied. On appeal, the builder asserts that the purchasers must be compelled to arbitrate their claims, despite never signing an agreement, because they directly benefit from the home the builder constructed. Recent rulings by the court established that the purchasers of a home may be compelled to arbitrate under the doctrine of direct benefits estoppel, thus the lower courts’ rulings were incorrect. Reversed.
Court: Texas Supreme Court, Judge: Per curiam, Filed On: June 30, 2023, Case #: 21-0072, Categories: Arbitration, Property, Negligence
Per curiam, the Supreme Court of Texas finds that a temporary injunction against enforcement of a Gov. Abbott executive order that prohibited local mask-wearing requirements must be dissolved. The case is remanded for further proceedings consistent with the court's opinion in "Abbott v. Harris County." Vacated.
Court: Texas Supreme Court, Judge: Per curiam, Filed On: June 30, 2023, Case #: 22-0328, Categories: Government, Preemption, Covid-19
Want access to unlimited case records and advanced research tools? Create your free CasePortal account now. No credit card required to register.
Try CasePortal for Free
J. Boyd finds the court of appeals properly ruled against the surviving family of a woman who was killed after being struck by a train. The family sued the railroad company, asserting that a raised hump on the tracks and a poorly maintained yield sign showed its negligence and liability. Because both theories were presented to the jury as one to question the negligence of the company, a harmful error was created. The jury was unable to distinguish which one they believe made the company liable. Affirmed.
Court: Texas Supreme Court, Judge: Boyd, Filed On: June 30, 2023, Case #: 21-0769, Categories: Jury, Negligence, Premises Liability
J. Blacklock finds that a temporary injunction against enforcement of a Gov. Abbott executive order that prohibited local mask-wearing requirements must be dissolved. The case is remanded for further proceedings consistent with the court's opinion in "Abbott v. Harris County." Vacated.
Court: Texas Supreme Court, Judge: Blacklock, Filed On: June 30, 2023, Case #: 21-1080, Categories: Government, Preemption, Covid-19
J. Lehrmann finds that the court of appeals improperly ruled in favor of the University of Texas in a public information case filed by a media organization seeking documents related to a relationship between the university and a law firm that was hired by the institution to handle an external investigation. After the court of appeals ruled that the documents must be released, the university appealed, arguing that they were protected under attorney-client privilege. The university hired the law firm for legal services, thus the documents detailing the investigation and relationship are protected from disclosure. Reversed.
Court: Texas Supreme Court, Judge: Lerhmann, Filed On: June 30, 2023, Case #: 21-0534, Categories: Government, Public Record, Privilege
Per curiam, the Texas Supreme Court finds that the court of appeals improperly ruled against the City of Houston in a negligence suit brought against it by a motorist who was involved in a vehicle collision with a Houston police officer. Because the motorist failed to raise a fact issue on whether the officer acted recklessly, the city’s immunity is not waived. Furthermore, because the officer was responding to an emergency, the city remains immune from suit. Reversed.
Court: Texas Supreme Court, Judge: Per curiam, Filed On: June 30, 2023, Case #: 22-0295, Categories: Government, Immunity, Negligence
J. Busby finds that the court of appeals improperly ruled in favor of a daughter in her lawsuit against an assisted living facility where her mother, a resident of the facility, sustained injuries that subsequently led to her death. The claims brought by the daughter fall under the Texas Medical Liability Act, a statute that requires an expert report to be filed with the court. The daughter's claims should have been dismissed because she failed to provide the report. Reversed.
Court: Texas Supreme Court, Judge: Busby, Filed On: June 30, 2023, Case #: 21-0470, Categories: Health Care, Experts
J. Hecht finds that the court of appeals improperly ruled against Texas Tech University Health Sciences Center in a disability discrimination case brought by a former staff member who alleges she was let go for being morbidly obese. Morbid obesity does not qualify as an impairment under the Texas Commission on Human Rights Act. For her morbid obesity to qualify as an impairment, the staff member would need to show that it is due to a physiological disease or condition, rather than her body's natural response to her "lifestyle choices or eating habits." Reversed.
Court: Texas Supreme Court, Judge: Hecht, Filed On: June 30, 2023, Case #: 22-0179 , Categories: Ada / Rehabilitation Act, Evidence, Employment Discrimination
J. Young finds that the court of appeals properly ruled against the owners of a tax consulting firm in a liability case it filed against the former stakeholder of the firm. An agreement between the parties stipulated that funds placed in escrow would be distributed to the stakeholder in the event he prevails in a separate case. After the funds were taken by the firm’s attorney, the firm’s owners sued the stakeholder, seeking to discharge themselves of further liability. While the funds were placed in escrow, the liability did not shift, thus the owners were still responsible for the funds and have not satisfied the agreement. Affirmed.
Court: Texas Supreme Court, Judge: Young, Filed On: June 30, 2023, Case #: 22-0050, Categories: Corporations, Fiduciary Duty, Contract
J. Devine finds the court of appeals improperly ruled in favor of the founders of a law firm who redeemed the shares of a recently departed member of the firm. The former member sued the founders, challenging their authority over his stock. The founders lacked the authority over the shares and thus did not have the legal authority to redeem them. Reversed.
Court: Texas Supreme Court, Judge: Devine, Filed On: June 23, 2023, Case #: 21-1014 , Categories: Securities, Business Practices, Contract
J. Hecht finds the court of appeals improperly ruled against a private investment group in a negligence lawsuit filed against it after a series of explosions occurred at a chemical plant managed by the group. The multiple lawsuits filed against the group were initiated after the chemical plant filed for bankruptcy. After the lower courts denied motions to dismiss the suits, the group petitioned for relief with the state supreme court, arguing that the claims were baseless. The parties suing the investment group fail to show that the group played any role in the alleged negligence of the chemical plant, so their claims should have been dismissed.
Court: Texas Supreme Court, Judge: Hecht, Filed On: June 23, 2023, Case #: 22-0227, Categories: Civil Procedure, Negligence, Business Expectancy
[CONSOLIDATED] J. Hecht finds the courts of appeals ruled improperly in part in two lawsuits filed by energy firms against the Electric Reliability Council of Texas for actions it took responding to Winter Storm Uri in 2021. Because ERCOT serves under the Public Utility Commission, a governmental agency, and performs a governmental function, it is entitled to immunity from suit. Furthermore, immunity serves to protect ERCOT from experiencing disruption to services. Reversed in part.
Court: Texas Supreme Court, Judge: Hecht, Filed On: June 23, 2023, Case #: 22-0056 , Categories: Energy, Government, Immunity
J. Hecht finds the court of appeals improperly ruled against a drug testing company in a suit filed by a test subject who alleges the company’s negligence caused a false positive and cost him a job opportunity. Under existing tort law, third-party companies do not owe a duty of care to employees. Reversed.
Court: Texas Supreme Court, Judge: Hecht, Filed On: June 23, 2023, Case #: 21-0496, Categories: Tort, Negligence, Business Expectancy
J. Hecht finds the court of appeals improperly ruled in favor of an individual in a personal injury suit he brought against an elevator maintenance company after an elevator he was riding in accelerated quickly and abruptly stopped. The individual argued during the jury trial that the company’s negligence can be inferred based on the details of the incident, which the jury did. After the court of appeals affirmed the ruling, the company petitioned for review, challenging the charge of negligence and sanctions against it. The evidence presented by the individual failed to show that the incident would not have occurred in the absence of negligence. Furthermore, the sanctions levied against the company were proper. Reversed in part, affirmed in part.
Court: Texas Supreme Court, Judge: Hecht, Filed On: June 16, 2023, Case #: 22-0030, Categories: Corporations, Evidence, Negligence
J. Huddle finds the court of appeals improperly ruled against a real estate developer in a negligence suit filed by a firm. In 2018, after the suit was dismissed, the firm went on to refile its suit against the developer, asserting that the statute of limitations had paused while it corrected defects in its legal case. The court of appeals ruled against the developer’s motion for summary judgment and assertion that the statute of limitations had expired on the case. The firm’s defect in its original suit was not one that allowed for the limitations to be paused, therefore their time to re-litigate the case has passed. Reversed.
Court: Texas Supreme Court, Judge: Huddle, Filed On: June 16, 2023, Case #: 21-0797, Categories: Civil Procedure, Real Estate
J. Busby finds the court of appeals improperly ruled in favor of a mother whose parental rights were terminated by the trial court after that court extended the deadline to hold a jury trial. The court of appeals reversed the trial court’s order, finding that because the court failed to expressly note that the extension was due to extraordinary circumstances the mother is entitled to a dismissal of the case. On petition for review, the Texas Department of Family and Protective Services argues that the trial court was not required to expressly note the reason for the extension. While the Family Code requires the court to identify that an extension is needed in light of extraordinary circumstances, the mother failed to object and raise issues with the trial court's mistake. She, therefore, failed to preserve the right to raise the issue on appeal. Reversed.
Court: Texas Supreme Court, Judge: Busby, Filed On: June 16, 2023, Case #: 22-0420, Categories: Civil Procedure, Jury, Guardianship
J. Blacklock finds the court of appeals improperly ruled in favor of the family of a motorist who was killed in a multi-car pile-up caused by a truck driver. After a jury awarded the family over $15 million in noneconomic damages, the truck driver petitioned for judicial review, arguing that the evidence failed to support the amount of damages. The family failed to justify that they experienced the amount awarded to them based on the evidence of the case. Reversed.
Court: Texas Supreme Court, Judge: Blacklock, Filed On: June 16, 2023, Case #: 21-0017, Categories: Evidence, Tort, Wrongful Death
J. Hecht finds the court of appeals properly ruled to terminate the parental rights of a mother to her children and name the Texas Department of Family and Protective Services as the children's managing conservator. The children experienced abuse and neglect from the mother. Additionally, the mother failed to complete court-mandated tasks in order to retain her parental rights. Affirmed.
Court: Texas Supreme Court, Judge: Hecht, Filed On: June 9, 2023, Case #: 21-0998, Categories: Family Law
J. Busby finds the court of appeals improperly ruled against a mother in a divorce decree that gave her former husband the ability to select the residence of their teenage daughter. The mother abandoned a jury trial in order to have her daughter interviewed as to which parent she would like to select her place of residence. The trial court failed to conduct the interview, giving the father the ability to choose the place of residence for all of the couple's children. In its failure to interview the daughter, the trial court violated requirements under the Family Code and harmed the mother. Reversed.
Court: Texas Supreme Court, Judge: Busby, Filed On: June 9, 2023, Case #: 22-0419, Categories: Family Law
J. Boyd finds the court of appeals properly ruled against the City of League City in a breach of contract case brought by a restaurant chain, in which it accused the city of failing to adhere to an agreement that would provide financial incentives for building a new restaurant in the city limits. The trial court and court of appeals denied the city’s jurisdictional plea to the suit, leading it to file a petition for review. Because the agreement was entered into on discretionary terms and does not serve a public service, the city is not entitled to governmental immunity. Affirmed.
Court: Texas Supreme Court, Judge: Boyd, Filed On: June 9, 2023, Case #: 21-0307, Categories: Government, Immunity, Contract
J. Lehrmann finds the court of appeals improperly ruled against the City of Austin in a premises liability suit brought by a pedestrian who fell from a curb while exiting a sidewalk cafe. The city, through its permit to the cafe, was not obligated to ensure the sidewalk was safe. It merely maintained the discretion to inspect the cafe and ensure it was keeping the area safe, therefore making the city immune from suit. Reversed.
Court: Texas Supreme Court, Judge: Lehrmann, Filed On: June 2, 2023, Case #: 22-0202, Categories: Government, Immunity, Premises Liability
J. Lehrmann finds the court of appeals improperly determined that an arbitration agreement is unconscionable in an employment discrimination suit. The employee failed to satisfy his burden to prove the arbitration agreement would result in an overwhelming cost to him to pursue his claims. Reversed.
Court: Texas Supreme Court, Judge: Lehrmann, Filed On: May 26, 2023, Case #: 22-0214, Categories: Arbitration, Employment Discrimination
J. Blacklock finds the court of appeals properly ruled in favor of a school district in a tax appraisal suit. The school district, on a contingent-fee basis, hired an attorney to bring its challenges against the appraisal district. The appraisal district argues that the fee agreement between the school district and the attorney is unlawful. While the school district was not permitted to enter into the contingent-fee agreement, dismissal of the suit would also be improper. The school district has the authority to challenge the appraisal district, and it should be given the opportunity to alter the agreement with the attorney or hire a new attorney on different terms. Affirmed.
Court: Texas Supreme Court, Judge: Blacklock, Filed On: May 19, 2023, Case #: 22-0313, Categories: Civil Procedure, Government, Tax
J. Hecht finds the court of appeals improperly ruled against a home loan company, dismissing its foreclosure case filed against a property owner. The court of appeals ruled that the county court lacked jurisdiction. However, the county court was acting per a county-specific statute, giving it the authority to rule on the matter. Reversed.
Court: Texas Supreme Court, Judge: Hecht, Filed On: May 19, 2023, Case #: 21-1109, Categories: Property, Jurisdiction, Foreclosure
J. Boyd finds the court of appeals improperly ruled against Ovintiv USA, an oil and gas company, in a case filed against it by another oil and gas company, 1776 Energy Partners. In a separate case, Ovintiv was ordered to make payments to Energy Partners after it withheld the payments. After making such payments, Energy Partners continued a suit against Ovintiv seeking interest on those payments. The court of appeals ruled that Ovintiv must pay the interest. However, under the state Natural Resources Code, withheld payments may not accrue interest and such a provision applies in this case. Reversed.
Court: Texas Supreme Court, Judge: Boyd, Filed On: May 19, 2023, Case #: 22-0095, Categories: Corporations, Partnerships
J. Bland finds that a lending company that claims a Dallas law firm's bungled filing cost it $1.2 million has a viable legal malpractice case, rejecting the firm's reliance on a state law that protects First Amendment rights. The lending company has overcome the law firm's anti-SLAPP defense, at least in this initial stage of the case, by providing evidence for each essential element of its legal malpractice claim. The lending company has also linked the firm's conduct to a monetary injury. Reversed.
Court: Texas Supreme Court, Judge: Bland, Filed On: May 19, 2023, Case #: 21-0437 , Categories: Anti-slapp, Evidence, Legal Malpractice
J. Lehrmann finds that the court of appeals improperly ruled in favor of an irrigation district, dismissing a condemnation suit brought by a water improvement district. The dispute between the governmental entities, located in Hidalgo County, began when the improvement district sought to extend a pipeline through a canal managed by the irrigation district. After the improvement district failed a suit to condemn the land for their project, the irrigation district filed a plea to the jurisdiction, asserting it was immune from suit. While governmental immunity may apply in cases similar to this, it does not in this case because the project is intended to benefit both entities involved. Reversed.
Court: Texas Supreme Court, Judge: Lehrmann, Filed On: May 19, 2023, Case #: 21-0507, Categories: Government, Water, Immunity