Dallas Court of Appeals cases for the week of August 15, 2011

Dallas Court of Appeals cases for the week of August 15, 2011

Dallas Court of Appeals cases for the week of August 15, 2011

For the week of August 15, 2011, the Dallas Court of Appeals issued twenty-one opinions in civil cases.  Fourteen of these dispose of a case without a detailed discussion of the merits (e.g., dismissing a case for want of prosecution, dismissing a case for mootness, dismissing a case pursuant to settlement).  The remaining nine cases are as follows:

Affordable Motor Co., Inc. v. LNA, LLC (05-10-00076-CV) – Recites well-established standard for reviewing traditional summary judgment.

Austin Commercial Contractors, L.P. v. Carter & Burgess, Inc. (05-10-01542-CV) – Recites well-established rule that, to obtain mandamus relief, a relator must show both that the trial court abused its discretion and that the relator has no adequate appellate remedy.

City of Combine v. Robinson (05-10-01384-CV) – Recites well-established (1) standard for reviewing whether the trial court has subject matter jurisdiction; and (2) rule that intentional torts do not fall within the scope of the waiver of immunity under the Texas Tort Claims Act.

City of Dallas v. Patrick (05-10-00727-CV) – Recites well-established (1) rule that a landowner has no duty to warn or protect trespassers from obvious defects or conditions; and (2) standard for reviewing trial court’s ruling on its subject matter jurisdiction.

Defterios v. Dallas Bayou Bend, Ltd. (05-08-01726-CV) – Recites well-established (1) standard for reviewing legal sufficiency of evidence; (2) rule that, to preserve a factual sufficiency complaint for appeal, a party must present the specific complaint to the trial court in a motion for new trial; (3) definition of “consequential damages”; (4) elements of proximate cause; and (5) definition of “cause-in-fact.”

Elite Door & Trim, Inc. v. Tapia (05-10-00635-CV) – Recites well-established (1) standard for reviewing dismissal for want of prosecution; (2) rule that the fair notice pleading standard does not require the pleader to plead evidentiary matters with meticulous particularity; (3) elements of negligence cause of action; and (4) elements of “breach of warranty for services” cause of action.

In re Cornerstone Healthcare Holding Group, Inc. (05-11-00634-CV) – Recites well-established rule that an appellate remedy is inadequate when a trial court improperly refuses to enforce a forum-selection clause.

In re R.M. (05-11-00485-CV) – Recites well-established (1) standard for reviewing order committing a person for inpatient mental health services; and (2) standard for reviewing order to administer psychoactive medication.

Khyber Holdings v. BAC Home Loans Servicing, LP (05-10-01334-CV) – Recites well-established standard for reviewing traditional summary judgment.

Spread the love

Spread the love