NO CV IN THE COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF TEXAS DALLAS, TEXAS. CITY OF DALLAS, Defendant/Appellant,

Size: px
Start display at page:

Download "NO CV IN THE COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF TEXAS DALLAS, TEXAS. CITY OF DALLAS, Defendant/Appellant,"

Transcription

1 NO CV ORAL ARGUMENT REQUESTED IN THE COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF TEXAS DALLAS, TEXAS CITY OF DALLAS, Defendant/Appellant, v. MAURYA LYNN PATRICK, Plaintiff/Appellee. APPELLEE S BRIEF AND APPENDIX DAVID TIJERINA (Texas Bar No ) CHRIS JOHNSON (Texas Bar No ) STOVALL & ASSOCIATES 6600 LBJ FRWY, HILLCREST OAKS IV SUITE 180 DALLAS, TEXAS (972) TELEPHONE (972) FACSIMILE ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLEE

2 IDENTITY OF PARTIES AND COUNSEL In accordance with Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure 38.1(a), the following is a list of all parties to the trial court s order from which this appeal is taken, and the names and addresses of all trial and appellate counsel: 1. Plaintiff/Appellee Maurya Lynn Patrick 2. Plaintiff/Appellee s Trial Counsel Aghabie Obisean (Texas Bar No ) Stovall & Associates 6600 LBJ Frwy., Hillcrest Oaks IV, Suite 180 Dallas, Texas Telephone No. (972) Facsimile No. (972) Plaintiff/Appellee s Appellate Counsel David Tijerina (Texas Bar No ) dtijerina@stovalllaw.com Chris Johnson (Texas Bar No ) cjohnson@stovalllaw.com Stovall & Associates 6600 LBJ Frwy., Hillcrest Oaks IV, Suite 180 Dallas, Texas Telephone No. (972) Facsimile No. (972) Defendant/Appellant The City of Dallas 5. Trial/Appellant s Trial Counsel Patricia Medrano (Texas Bar No ) 6. Defendant/Appellant s Appellate Counsel Patricia Medrano (Texas Bar No ) Barbara E. Rosenberg (Texas Bar No ) James B. Pinson (Texas Bar No ) Office of the City Attorney 7DN Dallas City Hall, 1500 Marilla Street Dallas, Texas Telephone No.: (214) Facsimile No. (214) i

3 TABLE OF CONTENTS INDEX OF AUTHORITIES..iii ISSUES PRESENTED..iv 1. Verbatim Issue Number One.iv 2. Verbatim Issue Number One.iv STATEMENT OF THE CASE..2 STATEMENT OF FACTS.3 SUMMARY OF ARGUMENT..3 ARGUMENTS AND AUTHORITIES..4 I. STANDARD OF REVIEW AND APPLICABLE LAW II. III. IV. THE RECREATIONAL USE STATUTE DOES NOT APPLY 5-7 EVEN IF THE RECREATIONAL USE STATUTE APPLIES, SOVERIGN IMMUNITY DOES NOT PROTECT THE CITY FROM SUIT FOR A PREMISES CLAIM...7 GROSS NEGLIGENCE CONCLUSION..9 PRAYER..10 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE.10 ii

4 TABLE OF AUTHORITIES CASES Bland Indep. Schl. Dist. v. Blue, 34 S.W.3d 547, 445 (Tex. 2000)...4 City of Bellmead v. Torres, 89 S.W.3d 611, 615 (Tex. 2002)...7 City of Plano v. Homoky, 294 S.W.3d 809, 813 (Tex. App.-Dallas 2009, no pet.)...5 City of Tyler v. Likes, 962 S.W.2d 489, 501 (Tex. 1997)..5 Hill v. State, 897 S.W.2d 533, 536 (Tex. App.-Ft. Worth 1995, no pet.)..6 Motel 6, Inc. v. Lopez, 929 S.W.2d 1, 3 (Tex. 1996)...5 Tex. Dep t of Parks & Wildlife v. Miranda, 133 S.W.3d 217, (Tex. 2004)..4, 8 Tex. Dep t of Transp. v. Jones, 8 S.W.3d 636, 638 (Tex. 1999) Turner v. Franklin, 2010 Tex. App. LEXIS * STATUTES Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code (11) Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code (2) Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code (c)(2), (d) & (f) Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code (f) Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code (c)(1) Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code (2) Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code (a) Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code iii

5 ISSUES PRESENTED 1. Under Texas Law, is a city zoo an educational premise rather than a park or other recreational premise so as to preclude application of the Recreational use Statute? 2. If the Recreational Use Statute applies, has the Appellee provided evidence creating a fact issue as to the gross negligence of the City so as to vest the trial court with subject matter jurisdiction over this matter? iv

6 NO CV IN THE COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF TEXAS DALLAS, TEXAS CITY OF DALLAS, Appellant, v. MAURYA LYNN PATRICK, Appellee. APPELLEE S BRIEF TO THE HONORABLE COURT OF APPEALS: In this interlocutory appeal, the City of Dallas ( City ) complained that the trial court erred in denying its plea to jurisdiction as to Maurya Patrick s ( Patrick ) premises liability cause of action. While Patrick s premises liability claim is governed by the Texas Tort Claims Act ( TTCA ), the record demonstrates that the trial court retained jurisdiction over this case as a matter of law. As such, this Court should affirm the trial court s decision denying the City s plea to jurisdiction. 1

7 STATEMENT OF FACTS On March 31, 2009, Patrick, her two grandchildren, and her mother visited the Dallas Zoo ( Zoo ), which was owned and operated by The City. (CR 6, 113, 147). Patrick did not pay an admission to enter the Zoo beaus her mother was a member of the Dallas Zoo (CR 148). Her purpose for visiting the Zoo that day was to have some fun and to let her grandchildren learn about the animals. (CR 148). As she was walking at the Zoo, she tripped and fell over a curb, which resulted in injuries. (CR 92, 96, ). Patrick was watching where she was walking, and weather was not a factor in causing her fall. (CR , 156). Patrick brought suit, asserting that the City s immunity was waived for her premises liability claim. (CR 78-88). In Patrick s Second Amended Petition, Patrick detailed how she sustained personal injuries when she tripped and fell on the curb from the walkway to the street, which was a premises defect. (CR 80). Furthermore, Patrick s pleadings included causes of action for premises liability as a business invitee under the TTCA, negligence and gross negligence, and an alternative claim under the Recreational Use Statute for gross negligence. (CR 81-85). The City filed a plea to the jurisdiction, asserting sovereign immunity and challenging the trial court s subject matter jurisdiction under the TTCA and Recreational Use Statute. (CR ). The City alleged that Patrick had failed to allege a waiver through gross negligence under the Recreational Use Statute even though Patrick claims that the City was grossly negligent. (CR 81-85, ). After a hearing in which the trial court denied the City s plea, the City appealed the order by filing its plea to the jurisdiction in this Court. (CR ). 2

8 SUMMARY OF ARGUMENT This is a response to an interlocutory appeal of the denial of the City s plea to the jurisdiction. Patrick s claim against the City arises from her trip and fall at the Dallas Zoo. Admittedly the operation and maintenance of zoos involve a government function. As such, Patrick is required to demonstrate that her claims invoked a waiver of immunity under Texas Tort Claims Act ( TTCA ). But, while the City attempts to characterize the Zoo as a park, the legislature has distinguished between parks and zoos. Furthermore, even looking at the Zoo s own mission statements, the Zoo supports its characterization as an educational entity rather than a park or recreational entity. As such, the Zoo owed Patrick a standard of care such as that which is afforded to invitees or licensees. Furthermore, as Patrick s mother was a member of the Dallas Zoo, Patrick though she did not pay an admission was a paying visitor. As such, the duty that the Zoo owed to Patrick was that of an invitee. Even if this Court determines that the Recreational Use Statute applies in this case, the City is not shielded from its gross negligence under this statute. Patrick pled gross negligence in her pleadings, and there is evidence that the City was grossly negligent. Thus, there is a genuine issue of fact as to whether the City was negligent, which vests the trial court with subject matter jurisdiction. 3

9 ARGUMENT AND AUTHORITIES I. Standard of Review and Applicable Law A plea to the jurisdiction contests a trial court s subject-matter jurisdiction. Tex. Dep t of Transp. v. Jones, 8 S.W.3d 636, 638 (Tex. 1999). The purpose of the pleas is not force the plaintiffs to preview their case on its merits. Bland Indep. Sch. Dist. v. Blue, 34 S.W.3d 547, 554 (Tex. 2000). Rather, the purpose behind a plea to the jurisdiction is to establish a reason why the merits of the plaintiff s claims should not be reached at all. Id. When a plea to the jurisdiction challenges the pleadings, the court determines if the pleader has alleged facts that affirmatively demonstrate the court s jurisdiction to hear the cause. Tex. Dep t of Parks & Wildlife v. Miranda, 133 S.W.3d 217, (Tex. 2004). Courts construe the pleadings liberally in favor of the plaintiff and look to the pleader s intent. Id. If the pleadings do not contain sufficient facts to affirmatively demonstrate the trial court s jurisdiction but do not affirmatively demonstrate incurable defects in jurisdiction, the issue is one of pleading sufficiency and the plaintiff should be afforded the opportunity to amend. Id. A plea to the jurisdiction may be granted without allowing the plaintiff an opportunity to amend where the pleadings affirmatively negate the existence of jurisdiction. Id. at 227. When a plea to the jurisdiction challenges the existence of jurisdictional facts, the trial court can consider relevant evidence submitted by the parties to help resolve the issues. Id. When the jurisdictional challenge implicates the merits of a plaintiff s cause of action and the plea to the jurisdiction includes evidence, the trial court reviews the evidence to determine whether a fact issue exists concerning that jurisdictional issue. Id. The trial court grants the plea to the jurisdiction as a matter of law only if the relevant evidence is undisputed or fails to raise a fact question on the jurisdictional issue. Id. at

10 This Court reviews the plea to the jurisdiction de novo. Id. II. The Recreational Use Statute Does Not Apply Sovereign immunity deprives a trial court of subject-matter jurisdiction for lawsuits against the State or other governmental units unless the State consents to suit. Id. This sovereign immunity extends to municipalities to the extent that the municipality engages in the exercise of governmental functions. See City of Tyler v. Likes, 962 S.W.2d 489, 501 (Tex. 1997). If a plaintiff s pleading establishes the legislature s consent to its lawsuit, sovereign immunity will not apply. See Jones, 8 S.W.3d at 638. The plaintiff may establish the legislature s consent to its lawsuit either by reference to a statute or express legislative permission. Id. The TTCA provides for a limited waiver for premises liability. See TEX. CIV. PRAC. & REM. CODE (2). If a claim arises from a premises defect, the government unit owes the claimant the duty that a private person owes to a licensee on private property, unless a claimant pays for the use of the premises. TEX. CIV. PRAC. & REM. CODE (a). If the plaintiff pays to use the premises, the governmental unit s duty is that owed to an invitee. City of Plano v. Homoky, 294 S.W.3d 809, 813 (Tex. App. Dallas 2009, no pet.). A land owner owes invitees a duty to exercise ordinary care to protect them from not only those risks of which the owner is actually aware but also the risks that the owner should be aware of after reasonable inspection. Motel 6, Inc v. Lopez, 929 S.W.2d 1, 3 (Tex. 1996). The City has failed to produce evidence conclusively demonstrating that that the Zoo was a recreational premise and that Patrick was engaging in recreation at the time of her injury at the Zoo. (CR 148). Rather, since Patrick was engaged in an educational activity at the time of her 5

11 injury at the Zoo, the Recreational Use Statute would not govern the standard of care owed to her. See generally TEX. CIV. PRAC. & REM. CODE (f). While the City has attempted to characterize the Zoo as a park, they ignore the fact that the legislature could have classified zoos as parks had it wished to but have done the opposite. The Texas Civil Practice and Remedies code outlines the liability of a municipality. TEX. CIV. PRAC. & REM. CODE In this section, the legislature has stated that a municipality is liable for damages arising from its governmental functions, which include thirty-six different types of governmental functions. Id. Amongst these governmental functions at number 13, the legislature listed parks and zoos. Id. When interpreting a statute, the terms should be construed in accordance with common usage and must be read in the context in which they are used. Hill v. State, 897 S.W.2d 533, 536 (Tex. App. Ft. Worth 1995, no pet.) (emphasis added). While the Appellant has attempted to classify the Zoo as a park, this Court should look to the context in which those terms are used within Section of the Texas Civil Practice and Remedies Code. In Section , the legislature uses both the word zoo as well as the word park, which indicates that the legislature has deemed these to be two separate, albeit related, types of public spaces. Furthermore, while the Appellant has attempted to classify the zoo to be a park according to Webster s New Collegiate Dictionary, the legislature has indicated that they have classified parks and zoos as separate things by the fact that it uses both terms in Section The legislature s actions demonstrate that it believed there to be a distinction between a park and a zoo. Further, the Zoo s own mission statement reflects that the Zoo s primary purpose is to provide an educational experience. (SCR ). And the legislature has done nothing indicating that it has blurred the lines of distinction between a zoo and a park. As the Zoo is not 6

12 a recreational premise, the standard to be applied to the Zoo is either that of an invitee or licensee. Here, though the Appellant is correct in that the Patrick did not pay an admission to the Zoo, Patrick was the recipient of the benefit conferred to her mother as a member of the Dallas Zoo. (CR 148). As such, Patrick was a person who had paid to use the Zoo for the purposes of Section (a) of the Texas Civil Practice and Remedies Code. Whether Patrick paid an admission is only part of the analysis as Patrick did not use the Zoo without charge as was contemplated within Section (a). As such, the correct duty owed her by the Zoo was that of an invitee. III. Even if the Recreational Use Statute applies, sovereign immunity does not protect the City from suit for a premises claim at a zoo where there is gross negligence The Recreational Use Statute applies, regardless of whether the person paid a fee or not, only if a plaintiff engages in recreation on government-owned recreational property and will further limit the duty of care owed in premises liability claims. TEX. CIV. PRAC. & REM. CODE (2), (3); , (c)(1), (g); If the Recreational Use Statute applies, the standard of care owed would be that owed to a trespasser (f). A government entity must be grossly negligent or must have acted with malicious intent or in bad faith if the Recreational Use Statute applies (c)(2), (d) & (f); see City of Bellmead v. Torres, 89 S.W.3d 611, 615 (Tex. 2002). Gross negligence means an act or omission that when viewed objectively from the standpoint of the actor at the time of its occurrence involves an extreme degree of risk; considering the probability and magnitude of the potential harm to others and of which the actor has actual, subjective awareness of the risk involved; but nevertheless proceeds with conscious 7

13 indifference to the rights, safety, or welfare of others. TEX. CIV. PRAC. & REM. CODE (11). In other words, if a plaintiff proves that the defendant knew about the peril, but his acts or omissions demonstrated that he didn t care, the plaintiff will have successfully proved gross negligence. Turner v. Franklin, 2010 Tex. App. LEXIS 6544 at *25. A premises defect claim might be brought under the recreational use statute as long as there is a factual dispute regarding the landowner s gross negligence with respect to the alleged defect. Miranda, 133 S.W.3d at In her Second Amended Petition, Patrick claims that the City acted with both negligence and gross negligence. Specifically, Patrick states that the City knew or should have known about the condition on the premises, the City failed to exercise ordinary care in the design, construction, and maintenance of the curb that caused her injuries, City failed to warn her of the condition, the City failed to make proper inspections of the Zoo, and failed to provide her with safe surroundings at the Zoo. There is a fact issue as to gross negligence in the case at hand. Along with Patrick s pleadings, the photographs are themselves evidence of the City s gross negligence. (CR 90). Here, the curb is itself proof that the City had actual awareness of its dangerous condition because the curb is a permanent part of the Zoo. (CR 90). Employees would have passed this area of the Zoo numerous times on any given day, but the City failed to take any steps to make this dangerous condition safe for its patrons. For example, the City failed to put up even the most rudimentary warnings that there was a ramp/curb in the area. (CR 90). Additionally, the City failed to even demarcate the area as a potential fall hazard by painting the curb a bright color so as to give Zoo patrons warning. While the Appellant contends that there is no fact issue as to gross negligence, Patrick has provided evidence of the Appellant s gross negligence, which creates an issue of fact and vests the trial court with jurisdiction. 8

14 While the Appellant contends that these allegations are conclusory, they, along with other evidence, create a fact issue as to whether the City was grossly negligent in regards to this curb. Since there is some evidence that the City acted with gross negligence in the case at issue, this claim is within the jurisdiction of the trial court. Although the Recreational Use Statute works to shield government from owing a duty to a plaintiff as an invitee or licensee, it does not shield government from the duty owed to a trespasser. Here, the City was grossly negligent and failed to even meet this low burden. As such, this Court should affirm the trial court s determination that jurisdiction was proper in this case. CONCLUSION While the city attempts to classify Patrick s activities at the Zoo as recreational activities, Patrick was actually involved in an education activity with her family. As such, the Recreational Use Statute does not govern the standard of care owed to her. As such, she was owed the duty of an invitee or licensee and not a trespasser. As Patrick s mother was a member of the Dallas Zoo, Patrick was not a person using the Zoo without charge as is contemplated within Section (a). Rather, this Court should determine that the fact that Patrick was the beneficiary of her mother s Dallas Zoo membership to be dispositive and find that she should be afforded the same care as an invitee. Even if this Court determines that the Recreational Use Statute applies, Patrick pled gross negligence and provided some evidence that the City was grossly negligent in the case at issue. This has created a fact issue, which vests the trial court with subject matter jurisdiction over this case. For these reasons, the trial court s order should be affirmed. 9

15 PRAYER WHEREFORE, PREMISES CONSIDERED, Appellee respectfully requests that this Court (1) affirms the trial court s order, and (2) awards Maurya Lynn Patrick any such other relief to which she is justly entitled. Respectfully submitted, STOVALL & ASSOCIATES BY: David Tijerina State Bar No Chris Johnson State Bar No LBJ Frwy., Hillcrest Oaks IV, Suite 180 Dallas, Texas (972) TELEPHONE (972) FACSIMILE ATTORNEYS FOR THE PLAINTIFF CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE The undersigned certifies that a true and correct copy of the above attached document was served via facsimile on this the day of, 2010, on counsel for the Appellant. CHRIS JOHNSON Patricia Medrano VIA FACSIMILE: Barbara E. Rosenberg James B. Pinson City Attorney s Office 1500 Marilla Street, Room 7D North Dallas, Texas

No CV IN THE COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF TEXAS AT DALLAS CITY OF DALLAS, Defendant/Appellant, MAURYA PATRICK,

No CV IN THE COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF TEXAS AT DALLAS CITY OF DALLAS, Defendant/Appellant, MAURYA PATRICK, ORAL ARGUMENT REQUESTED No. 05-10-00727-CV IN THE COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF TEXAS AT DALLAS CITY OF DALLAS, Defendant/Appellant, v. MAURYA PATRICK, Plaintiff/Appellee. REPLY BRIEF

More information

IN THE TENTH COURT OF APPEALS. No CV. From the 335th District Court Burleson County, Texas Trial Court No. 26,407 MEMORANDUM OPINION

IN THE TENTH COURT OF APPEALS. No CV. From the 335th District Court Burleson County, Texas Trial Court No. 26,407 MEMORANDUM OPINION IN THE TENTH COURT OF APPEALS No. 10-12-00102-CV THE CITY OF CALDWELL, TEXAS, v. PAUL LILLY, Appellant Appellee From the 335th District Court Burleson County, Texas Trial Court No. 26,407 MEMORANDUM OPINION

More information

NUMBER CV COURT OF APPEALS THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS TEXAS STATE BOARD OF NURSING, BERNARDINO PEDRAZA JR.,

NUMBER CV COURT OF APPEALS THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS TEXAS STATE BOARD OF NURSING, BERNARDINO PEDRAZA JR., NUMBER 13-11-00068-CV COURT OF APPEALS THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG TEXAS STATE BOARD OF NURSING, Appellants, v. BERNARDINO PEDRAZA JR., Appellee. On appeal from the 93rd District

More information

Court of Appeals Ninth District of Texas at Beaumont

Court of Appeals Ninth District of Texas at Beaumont In The Court of Appeals Ninth District of Texas at Beaumont NO. 09-10-00394-CV BOBIE KENNETH TOWNSEND, Appellant V. MONTGOMERY CENTRAL APPRAISAL DISTRICT, Appellee On Appeal from the 359th District Court

More information

TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN NO. 03-01-00478-CV City of San Angelo, Appellant v. Terrell Terry Smith, Appellee FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF TOM GREEN COUNTY, 119TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT

More information

CV. In the Court of Appeals For the Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

CV. In the Court of Appeals For the Fifth District of Texas at Dallas 05-11-01687-CV ACCEPTED 225EFJ016746958 FIFTH COURT OF APPEALS DALLAS, TEXAS 12 February 26 P12:53 Lisa Matz CLERK In the Court of Appeals For the Fifth District of Texas at Dallas NEXION HEALTH AT DUNCANVILLE,

More information

TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN NO. 03-06-00197-CV City of Garden Ridge, Texas, Appellant v. Curtis Ray, Appellee FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF COMAL COUNTY, 22ND JUDICIAL DISTRICT NO. C-2004-1131A,

More information

In The Court of Appeals Seventh District of Texas at Amarillo

In The Court of Appeals Seventh District of Texas at Amarillo In The Court of Appeals Seventh District of Texas at Amarillo No. 07-13-00287-CV CITY OF FRITCH, APPELLANT V. KIRK COKER, APPELLEE On Appeal from the 84th District Court Hutchinson County, Texas Trial

More information

In the Fifth District Court of Appeals At Dallas

In the Fifth District Court of Appeals At Dallas NO. 05-11-01144-CV ACCEPTED 225EFJ016580482 FIFTH COURT OF APPEALS DALLAS, TEXAS 11 November 7 P1:43 Lisa Matz CLERK In the Fifth District Court of Appeals At Dallas DALLAS METROCARE SERVICES, Appellant,

More information

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF TEXAS

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF TEXAS IN THE SUPREME COURT OF TEXAS 444444444444 NO. 09-0369 444444444444 GLENN COLQUITT, PETITIONER, v. BRAZORIA COUNTY, RESPONDENT 4444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444 ON PETITION FOR REVIEW

More information

Court of Appeals. First District of Texas

Court of Appeals. First District of Texas Opinion issued December 6, 2012 In The Court of Appeals For The First District of Texas NO. 01-11-00877-CV THE CITY OF HOUSTON, Appellant V. GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES INSURANCE COMPANY, AS SUBROGEE, Appellee

More information

In The Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas. No CV

In The Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas. No CV Reverse and Render; Opinion Filed July 6, 2018. In The Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas No. 05-17-01221-CV THE UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS SOUTHWESTERN MEDICAL CENTER, Appellant V. CHARLES WAYNE

More information

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF TEXAS

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF TEXAS IN THE SUPREME COURT OF TEXAS 444444444444 NO. 15-0094 444444444444 CITY OF DALLAS, PETITIONER, v. DIANE SANCHEZ, INDIVIDUALLY AND AS REPRESENTATIVE OF THE ESTATE OF MATTHEW SANCHEZ, DECEASED, AND ARNOLD

More information

NUMBER CV COURT OF APPEALS THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG THE CITY OF PHARR, TEXAS,

NUMBER CV COURT OF APPEALS THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG THE CITY OF PHARR, TEXAS, NUMBER 13-15-00133-CV COURT OF APPEALS THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG THE CITY OF PHARR, TEXAS, Appellant, v. DORA HERRERA, INDIVIDUALLY AND AS REPRESENTATIVE OF THE ESTATE OF REYNALDO

More information

TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN NO. 03-14-00455-CV Canario s, Inc., Appellant v. City of Austin, Appellee FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF TRAVIS COUNTY, 250TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT NO. D-1-GN-13-003779,

More information

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF TEXAS

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF TEXAS IN THE SUPREME COURT OF TEXAS 444444444444 NO. 11-0437 444444444444 TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION, PETITIONER, v. JOSE LUIS PERCHES, SR. AND ALMA DELIA PERCHES, INDIVIDUALLY AND ON BEHALF OF THE ESTATE

More information

TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN NO. 03-12-00678-CV Darnell Delk, Appellant v. The Honorable Rosemary Lehmberg, District Attorney and The Honorable Robert Perkins, Judge, Appellees FROM

More information

Fourth Court of Appeals San Antonio, Texas

Fourth Court of Appeals San Antonio, Texas Fourth Court of Appeals San Antonio, Texas MEMORANDUM OPINION No. 04-13-00133-CV ROMA INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT, Appellant v. Noelia M. GUILLEN, Raul Moreno, Dagoberto Salinas, and Tony Saenz, Appellees

More information

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF TEXAS

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF TEXAS IN THE SUPREME COURT OF TEXAS No. 17-0329 HARRIS COUNTY, TEXAS, PETITIONER, v. LORI ANNAB, RESPONDENT ON PETITION FOR REVIEW FROM THE COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS Argued March

More information

Review of Recent Juvenile Cases (2011)

Review of Recent Juvenile Cases (2011) Review of Recent Juvenile Cases (2011) by The Honorable Pat Garza Associate Judge 386th District Court San Antonio, Texas An employee of the El Paso Juvenile Probation Department is not an "employee" of

More information

Court of Appeals. First District of Texas

Court of Appeals. First District of Texas Opinion issued December 16, 2010 In The Court of Appeals For The First District of Texas NO. 01-10-00669-CV HITCHCOCK INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT, Appellant V. DOREATHA WALKER, Appellee On Appeal from

More information

In The. Court of Appeals. Ninth District of Texas at Beaumont NO CV. CHRISTUS ST. ELIZABETH HOSPITAL, Appellant

In The. Court of Appeals. Ninth District of Texas at Beaumont NO CV. CHRISTUS ST. ELIZABETH HOSPITAL, Appellant In The Court of Appeals Ninth District of Texas at Beaumont NO. 09-12-00490-CV CHRISTUS ST. ELIZABETH HOSPITAL, Appellant V. DOROTHY GUILLORY, Appellee On Appeal from the County Court at Law No. 1 Jefferson

More information

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF TEXAS

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF TEXAS IN THE SUPREME COURT OF TEXAS 444444444444 NO. 11-0686 444444444444 TEXAS ADJUTANT GENERAL S OFFICE, PETITIONER, v. MICHELE NGAKOUE, RESPONDENT 4444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444 ON PETITION

More information

Fourteenth Court of Appeals

Fourteenth Court of Appeals Appellant s Motion for Rehearing Overruled; Opinion of August 13, 2015 Withdrawn; Reversed and Rendered and Substitute Memorandum Opinion filed November 10, 2015. In The Fourteenth Court of Appeals NO.

More information

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF TEXAS

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF TEXAS IN THE SUPREME COURT OF TEXAS 444444444444 NO. 04-0460 444444444444 THE STATE OF TEXAS AND THE TEXAS PARKS AND WILDLIFE DEPARTMENT, PETITIONERS, v. RICKY SHUMAKE AND SANDRA SHUMAKE, INDIVIDUALLY AND AS

More information

NUMBER CV COURT OF APPEALS THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS CORPUS CHRISTI EDINBURG

NUMBER CV COURT OF APPEALS THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS CORPUS CHRISTI EDINBURG NUMBER 13-17-00447-CV COURT OF APPEALS THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS CORPUS CHRISTI EDINBURG COUNTY OF HIDALGO, Appellant, v. MARY ALICE PALACIOS Appellee. On appeal from the 93rd District Court of Hidalgo

More information

2013 YEAR IN REVIEW SIGNIFICANT DECISIONS IN 2013: LOCAL GOVERNMENT CASE LAW UPDATE. By Stephen D. Henninger

2013 YEAR IN REVIEW SIGNIFICANT DECISIONS IN 2013: LOCAL GOVERNMENT CASE LAW UPDATE. By Stephen D. Henninger 2013 YEAR IN REVIEW SIGNIFICANT DECISIONS IN 2013: LOCAL GOVERNMENT CASE LAW UPDATE By Stephen D. Henninger University of Texas M.D. Anderson Cancer Center v. Vicki M. King, 2013 Tex. App. Lexis 7861 (Tex.

More information

TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN NO. 03-12-00242-CV Billy Ross Sims, Appellant v. Jennifer Smith and Celia Turner, Appellees FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF TRAVIS COUNTY, 201ST JUDICIAL DISTRICT

More information

Fourth Court of Appeals San Antonio, Texas

Fourth Court of Appeals San Antonio, Texas Fourth Court of Appeals San Antonio, Texas MEMORANDUM OPINION No. City of SAN ANTONIO, Appellant v. Carlos MENDOZA, Appellee From the 73rd Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas Trial Court No. 2016CI09979

More information

TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN NO. 03-09-00363-CV Mark Buethe, Appellant v. Rita O Brien, Appellee FROM COUNTY COURT AT LAW NO. 1 OF TRAVIS COUNTY NO. C-1-CV-06-008044, HONORABLE ERIC

More information

In The Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas. No CV

In The Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas. No CV AFFIRM; and Opinion Filed February 20, 2014. S In The Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas No. 05-12-01308-CV KAREN DAVISON, Appellant V. PLANO INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT, DOUGLAS OTTO,

More information

Fourteenth Court of Appeals

Fourteenth Court of Appeals Reversed and Rendered and Majority and Concurring Opinions filed October 15, 2015. In The Fourteenth Court of Appeals NO. 14-14-00823-CV TEXAS TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION AND TED HOUGHTON, IN HIS OFFICIAL

More information

COURT OF APPEALS SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS FORT WORTH

COURT OF APPEALS SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS FORT WORTH COURT OF APPEALS SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS FORT WORTH NO. 2-08-374-CV CITY OF ARLINGTON, TEXAS AND ALISON TURNER APPELLANTS MARK ALLEN RANDALL V. ------------ APPELLEE FROM THE 352ND DISTRICT COURT OF TARRANT

More information

In The Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas. No CV. CITY OF DALLAS, Appellant V. D.R. HORTON TEXAS, LTD.

In The Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas. No CV. CITY OF DALLAS, Appellant V. D.R. HORTON TEXAS, LTD. AFFIRMED; Opinion Filed July 10, 2015. In The Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas No. 05-14-01414-CV CITY OF DALLAS, Appellant V. D.R. HORTON TEXAS, LTD., Appellee On Appeal from the 116th

More information

FIFTH COURT OF APPEALS

FIFTH COURT OF APPEALS No. 05-11-01327-CV ACCEPTED 225EFJ016716717 FIFTH COURT OF APPEALS DALLAS, TEXAS 12 February 7 P7:40 Lisa Matz CLERK In The FIFTH COURT OF APPEALS Dallas, Texas Edmund Sanchez, M.D. and Henry B. Randall,

More information

TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN NO. 03-12-00555-CV Texas Commission on Environmental Quality, Appellant v. Angela Bonser-Lain; Karin Ascott, as next friend on behalf of T.V.H. and A.V.H.,

More information

1 of 1 DOCUMENT. SHERYL JOHNSON-TODD, Appellant V. JOHN S. MORGAN, Appellee NO CV COURT OF APPEALS OF TEXAS, NINTH DISTRICT, BEAUMONT

1 of 1 DOCUMENT. SHERYL JOHNSON-TODD, Appellant V. JOHN S. MORGAN, Appellee NO CV COURT OF APPEALS OF TEXAS, NINTH DISTRICT, BEAUMONT Page 1 1 of 1 DOCUMENT SHERYL JOHNSON-TODD, Appellant V. JOHN S. MORGAN, Appellee NO. 09-15-00210-CV COURT OF APPEALS OF TEXAS, NINTH DISTRICT, BEAUMONT 2015 Tex. App. LEXIS 11078 October 29, 2015, Opinion

More information

PLAINTIFFS ORIGINAL PETITION

PLAINTIFFS ORIGINAL PETITION 4-CIT ES DC-17-04591 CAUSE NUMBER FILED DALLAS COUNTY 4/19/2017 3:17:14 PM FELICIA PITRE DISTRICT CLERK Marissa Pittman D. DARLING V. TEXAS ENTERTAINMENT SERVICES, L.L.C., ICP, LIVE NATION ENTERTAINMENT,

More information

NO CV IN THE COURT OF APPEALS TWELFTH COURT OF APPEALS DISTRICT TYLER, TEXAS

NO CV IN THE COURT OF APPEALS TWELFTH COURT OF APPEALS DISTRICT TYLER, TEXAS NO. 12-07-00287-CV IN THE COURT OF APPEALS TWELFTH COURT OF APPEALS DISTRICT TYLER, TEXAS D JUANA DUNN, INDIVIDUALLY AND AS NEXT FRIEND FOR APPEAL FROM THE 7TH J. D., APPELLANT V. JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT

More information

LIABILITY UNDER THE TEXAS TORT CLAIMS ACT

LIABILITY UNDER THE TEXAS TORT CLAIMS ACT LIABILITY UNDER THE TEXAS TORT CLAIMS ACT By: Richard Evans Staff Attorney Texas Municipal League Intergovernmental Risk Pool The King Can Do No Wrong 1 Sovereign Immunity Under common law, state and political

More information

REVERSE and REMAND in part; AFFIRM in part; and Opinion Filed February 20, In The Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

REVERSE and REMAND in part; AFFIRM in part; and Opinion Filed February 20, In The Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas REVERSE and REMAND in part; AFFIRM in part; and Opinion Filed February 20, 2019 S In The Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas No. 05-18-00130-CV BRYAN INMAN, Appellant V. HENRY LOE, JR.,

More information

TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN NO. 03-08-00475-CV Texans Uniting for Reform and Freedom, Appellant v. Amadeo Saenz, Jr., P.E., Individually and in his Official Capacity as Executive

More information

Court of Appeals. First District of Texas

Court of Appeals. First District of Texas Opinion issued July 30, 2015 In The Court of Appeals For The First District of Texas NO. 01-14-00360-CV GEORGE M. BISHOP, DOUG BULCAO, SENATOR JOHN WHITMIRE, PAULA BARNETT, MARSHA W. ZUMMO, JUAN CARLOS

More information

CAUSE NO CV FIFTH DISTRICT COURT OF APPEALS DALLAS COUNTY, TEXAS INWOOD ON THE PARK, APPELLANT, STEPHANIE MORRIS AND ALL OCCUPANTS,

CAUSE NO CV FIFTH DISTRICT COURT OF APPEALS DALLAS COUNTY, TEXAS INWOOD ON THE PARK, APPELLANT, STEPHANIE MORRIS AND ALL OCCUPANTS, CAUSE NO. 05-11-01042-CV ACCEPTED 225EFJ016539672 FIFTH COURT OF APPEALS DALLAS, TEXAS 11 October 12 A9:39 Lisa Matz CLERK FIFTH DISTRICT COURT OF APPEALS DALLAS COUNTY, TEXAS INWOOD ON THE PARK, APPELLANT,

More information

In The Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas. No CV

In The Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas. No CV Affirmed; Opinion Filed February 14, 2014. S In The Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas No. 05-13-00861-CV TDINDUSTRIES, INC., Appellant V. MY THREE SONS, LTD., MY THREE SONS MANAGEMENT,

More information

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF TEXAS

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF TEXAS IN THE SUPREME COURT OF TEXAS 444444444444 NO. 08-0094 444444444444 DALLAS COUNTY, PETITIONER, v. KIM POSEY, ET AL., RESPONDENT 4444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444 ON PETITION FOR REVIEW

More information

In The Court of Appeals Seventh District of Texas at Amarillo

In The Court of Appeals Seventh District of Texas at Amarillo In The Court of Appeals Seventh District of Texas at Amarillo No. 07-13-00177-CV ANTHONY GOINGS AND 2004 CADILLAC CTS SEDAN, TEXAS LICENSE PLATE CK2V636 VIN #1G6DM577840147293, APPELLANTS V. THE STATE

More information

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS FIFTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF TEXAS DALLAS, TEXAS. No CV. HAMILTON GUARANTY CAPITAL, LLC, Appellant,

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS FIFTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF TEXAS DALLAS, TEXAS. No CV. HAMILTON GUARANTY CAPITAL, LLC, Appellant, IN THE COURT OF APPEALS FIFTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF TEXAS DALLAS, TEXAS No. 05-11-01401-CV 5th Court of Appeals FILED: 02/08/2012 14:00 Lisa Matz, Clerk HAMILTON GUARANTY CAPITAL, LLC, Appellant, v. ORPHAN

More information

No CV IN THE COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF TEXAS AT DALLAS

No CV IN THE COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF TEXAS AT DALLAS ORAL ARGUMENT REQUESTED No. 05-17-00879-CV IN THE COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF TEXAS AT DALLAS HINGA MBOGO, HINGA S AUTOMOTIVE CO., and 3516 ROSS AVENUE, DALLAS, TEXAS, Appellants,

More information

In The Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas OPINION

In The Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas OPINION AFFIRM; and Opinion Filed April 2, 2013. S In The Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas No. 05-11-01039-CV ANDREA SHERMAN, Appellant V. HEALTHSOUTH SPECIALTY HOSPITAL, INC. D/B/A HEALTHSOUTH

More information

Court of Appeals. First District of Texas

Court of Appeals. First District of Texas Opinion issued September 20, 2012 In The Court of Appeals For The First District of Texas NO. 01-10-00836-CV GORDON R. GOSS, Appellant V. THE CITY OF HOUSTON, Appellee On Appeal from the 270th District

More information

COURT OF APPEALS EIGHTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS EL PASO, TEXAS

COURT OF APPEALS EIGHTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS EL PASO, TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS EIGHTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS EL PASO, TEXAS CONSTABLE LUIS AGUILAR, Appellant, v. ALFONSO FRIAS, Appellee. No. 08-11-00202-CV Appeal from the 346 th District Court of El Paso County, Texas

More information

Court of Appeals. First District of Texas

Court of Appeals. First District of Texas Opinion issued August 25, 2011 In The Court of Appeals For The First District of Texas NO. 01-06-00490-CV THE UNIVERSITY OF HOUSTON, Appellant V. STEPHEN BARTH, Appellee On Appeal from the 113th District

More information

Fourth Court of Appeals San Antonio, Texas

Fourth Court of Appeals San Antonio, Texas Fourth Court of Appeals San Antonio, Texas MEMORANDUM OPINION No. 04-14-00167-CV STEPHENS & JOHNSON OPERTING CO.; Henry W. Breyer, III, Trust; CAH, Ltd.-MOPI for Capital Account; CAH, Ltd.-Stivers Capital

More information

MEMORANDUM OPINION. No CV. Christian W. PFISTER, Appellant. Elizabeth DE LA ROSA and Rosedale Place, Inc., Appellees

MEMORANDUM OPINION. No CV. Christian W. PFISTER, Appellant. Elizabeth DE LA ROSA and Rosedale Place, Inc., Appellees MEMORANDUM OPINION No. Christian W. PFISTER, Appellant v. Elizabeth DE LA ROSA and Rosedale Place, Inc., Appellees From the 166th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas Trial Court No. 2010-CI-20906

More information

COURT OF APPEALS SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS FORT WORTH

COURT OF APPEALS SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS FORT WORTH COURT OF APPEALS SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS FORT WORTH NO. 02-14-00146-CV ACE CASH EXPRESS, INC. APPELLANT V. THE CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS APPELLEE ---------- FROM THE 16TH DISTRICT COURT OF DENTON COUNTY TRIAL

More information

COURT OF APPEALS THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS CORPUS CHRISTI EDINBURG

COURT OF APPEALS THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS CORPUS CHRISTI EDINBURG NUMBER 13-16-00426-CV COURT OF APPEALS THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS CORPUS CHRISTI EDINBURG LA JOYA INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT, Appellant, v. TANYA GONZALEZ, INDIVIDUALLY AND A/N/F of JOSUE ROGELIO URANGA,

More information

MARIE F. LOSTRANGIO OPINION BY v. Record No JUSTICE LAWRENCE L. KOONTZ, JR. April 20, 2001 VALERIE LAINGFORD, ET AL.

MARIE F. LOSTRANGIO OPINION BY v. Record No JUSTICE LAWRENCE L. KOONTZ, JR. April 20, 2001 VALERIE LAINGFORD, ET AL. Present: All the Justices MARIE F. LOSTRANGIO OPINION BY v. Record No. 001203 JUSTICE LAWRENCE L. KOONTZ, JR. April 20, 2001 VALERIE LAINGFORD, ET AL. FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF NORTHAMPTON COUNTY Glen

More information

TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN NO. 03-05-00174-CV Elgin Independent School District, Emilia Lopez and Dora Morua, Appellants v. R. N., a Minor Child By Victoria Newman, Individually

More information

NO CV IN THE COURT OF APPEALS FIFTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS AT DALLAS. JJW DEVELOPMENT, LLC and JOHN J. WINGFILED, JR.

NO CV IN THE COURT OF APPEALS FIFTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS AT DALLAS. JJW DEVELOPMENT, LLC and JOHN J. WINGFILED, JR. ORAL ARGUMENT REQUESTED NO. 05-10-01359-CV 5th Court of Appeals FILED: 8/19/11 14:00 Lisa Matz, Clerk IN THE COURT OF APPEALS FIFTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS AT DALLAS JJW DEVELOPMENT, LLC and JOHN J. WINGFILED,

More information

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF TEXAS

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF TEXAS IN THE SUPREME COURT OF TEXAS 444444444444 NO. 01-0619 444444444444 TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND WILDLIFE, PETITIONER, v. MARIA MIRANDA AND RAY MIRANDA, RESPONDENTS 4444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444

More information

COURT OF APPEALS EIGHTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS EL PASO, TEXAS O P I N I O N

COURT OF APPEALS EIGHTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS EL PASO, TEXAS O P I N I O N COURT OF APPEALS EIGHTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS EL PASO, TEXAS EL PASO COUNTY, Appellant, v. HERLINDA ALVARADO, Appellee. O P I N I O N No. 08-07-00351-CV Appeal from the 327th District Court of El Paso County,

More information

IN THE TENTH COURT OF APPEALS. No CV. From the 66th District Court Hill County, Texas Trial Court No MEMORANDUM OPINION

IN THE TENTH COURT OF APPEALS. No CV. From the 66th District Court Hill County, Texas Trial Court No MEMORANDUM OPINION IN THE TENTH COURT OF APPEALS No. 10-12-00446-CV ARROWHEAD RESORT, LLC, v. HILL COUNTY, TEXAS, Appellant Appellee From the 66th District Court Hill County, Texas Trial Court No. 47948 MEMORANDUM OPINION

More information

Cause No CV IN THE COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF TEXAS DALLAS, TEXAS. MARTIN GREENSTEIN, Appellant

Cause No CV IN THE COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF TEXAS DALLAS, TEXAS. MARTIN GREENSTEIN, Appellant Cause No. 05-09-00640-CV IN THE COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF TEXAS DALLAS, TEXAS MARTIN GREENSTEIN, Appellant v. CURTIS LEO BAGGETT and BART BAGGETT, Appellees Appealed from the

More information

In The Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas. No CV. BBP SUB I LP, Appellant V. JOHN DI TUCCI, Appellee

In The Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas. No CV. BBP SUB I LP, Appellant V. JOHN DI TUCCI, Appellee AFFIRM; and Opinion Filed July 29, 2014. S In The Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas No. 05-12-01523-CV BBP SUB I LP, Appellant V. JOHN DI TUCCI, Appellee On Appeal from the 14th Judicial

More information

Court of Appeals. First District of Texas

Court of Appeals. First District of Texas Opinion issued November 3, 2015 In The Court of Appeals For The First District of Texas NO. 01-14-01025-CV ALI LAHIJANI AND MEGA SHIPPING, LLC, Appellants V. MELIFERA PARTNERS, LLC, MW REALTY GROUP, AND

More information

CAUSE NO GINGER WEATHERSPOON, IN THE 44 th -B JUDICIAL. Defendant. DALLAS COUNTY, TEXAS DEFENDANT S PLEA TO THE JURISDICTION

CAUSE NO GINGER WEATHERSPOON, IN THE 44 th -B JUDICIAL. Defendant. DALLAS COUNTY, TEXAS DEFENDANT S PLEA TO THE JURISDICTION CAUSE NO. 09-06233 Filed 10 August 23 P12:26 Gary Fitzsimmons District Clerk Dallas District GINGER WEATHERSPOON, IN THE 44 th -B JUDICIAL Plaintiff, v. DISTRICT COURT OF OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL

More information

TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN NO. 03-07-00033-CV Arnold Macias, Appellant v. Texas Department of Criminal Justice Parole Division, Tammy Boddy, Paul Morales, Lana Rhodes, Pat Ivy, and

More information

Court of Appeals. First District of Texas

Court of Appeals. First District of Texas Opinion issued February 23, 2016 In The Court of Appeals For The First District of Texas NO. 01-15-00163-CV XIANGXIANG TANG, Appellant V. KLAUS WIEGAND, Appellee On Appeal from the 268th District Court

More information

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF TEXAS

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF TEXAS IN THE SUPREME COURT OF TEXAS 444444444444 NO. 03-0669 444444444444 DILLARD DEPARTMENT STORES, INC., PETITIONER, v. LYNDON SILVA, RESPONDENT 4444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444 ON PETITION

More information

No CV IN THE THIRD COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE STATE OF TEXAS. VICKI BELCHER AND MICHAEL BELCHER, Appellants (Defendants below)

No CV IN THE THIRD COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE STATE OF TEXAS. VICKI BELCHER AND MICHAEL BELCHER, Appellants (Defendants below) ACCEPTED 03-16-00502-CV 13557685 THIRD COURT OF APPEALS AUSTIN, TEXAS 11/1/2016 2:17:43 PM JEFFREY D. KYLE CLERK No. 03-16-00502-CV IN THE THIRD COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE STATE OF TEXAS FILED IN 3rd COURT

More information

For Preview Only - Please Do Not Copy

For Preview Only - Please Do Not Copy Information or instructions: Plaintiff's original petition-auto accident 1. The following form may be used to file a personal injury lawsuit. 2. It assumes several plaintiffs were rear-ended by an employee

More information

CAUSE NUMBER DC H. DEBORAH BROCK AND IN THE DISTRICT COURT CHRIS BROCK Plaintiffs

CAUSE NUMBER DC H. DEBORAH BROCK AND IN THE DISTRICT COURT CHRIS BROCK Plaintiffs CAUSE NUMBER DC-09-0044-H DEBORAH BROCK AND IN THE DISTRICT COURT CHRIS BROCK Plaintiffs vs. MELVIN WAYNE MANSFIELD; DALLAS COUNTY, TEXAS DISTRIBUTION TRANSPORTATION SERVICES COMPANY; DTS TRUCK DIVISION

More information

For Preview Only - Please Do Not Copy

For Preview Only - Please Do Not Copy Information or instructions: Petition for a Declaratory Judgment 1. This petition requests the court to render a judgment as a declaratory judgment. A declaratory judgment is used when a justicible controversy

More information

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF TEXAS

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF TEXAS IN THE SUPREME COURT OF TEXAS NO. 10-08 RUSK STATE HOSPITAL, PETITIONER, v. DENNIS BLACK AND PAM BLACK, INDIVIDUALLY AND AS REPRESENTATIVES OF THE ESTATE OF TRAVIS BONHAM BLACK, DECEASED, RESPONDENTS ON

More information

In The Court of Appeals Seventh District of Texas at Amarillo

In The Court of Appeals Seventh District of Texas at Amarillo In The Court of Appeals Seventh District of Texas at Amarillo No. 07-15-00078-CV THE CITY OF LUBBOCK, TEXAS, APPELLANT V. LAZARO WALCK, APPELLEE On Appeal from the 72nd District Court Lubbock County, Texas

More information

In The Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas. No CV

In The Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas. No CV Reverse and Render and Opinion Filed July 3, 2018 S In The Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas No. 05-17-00372-CV AVPM CORP. D/B/A STONELEIGH PLACE, Appellant V. TRACY L. CHILDERS AND MARY

More information

JUDGMENT AFFIRMED. Division VII Opinion by JUDGE J. JONES Russel and Terry, JJ., concur. Announced December 24, 2009

JUDGMENT AFFIRMED. Division VII Opinion by JUDGE J. JONES Russel and Terry, JJ., concur. Announced December 24, 2009 COLORADO COURT OF APPEALS Court of Appeals No. 08CA2342 City and County of Denver District Court No. 07CV9223 Honorable Morris B. Hoffman, Judge Cynthia Burbach, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Canwest Investments,

More information

NO v. HARRIS COUNTY, TEXAS DEFENDANT CITY OF HOUSTON S PLEA TO THE JURISDICTION

NO v. HARRIS COUNTY, TEXAS DEFENDANT CITY OF HOUSTON S PLEA TO THE JURISDICTION 6/20/2017 4:41 PM Chris Daniel - District Clerk Harris County Envelope No. 17735728 By: Tammy Tolman Filed: 6/20/2017 4:41 PM NO. 2017-36216 HOUSTON FIREFIGHTERS RELIEF AND RETIREMENT FUND, Plaintiff,

More information

Case 1:18-cv RP Document 1 Filed 06/13/18 Page 1 of 13 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS AUSTIN DIVISION

Case 1:18-cv RP Document 1 Filed 06/13/18 Page 1 of 13 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS AUSTIN DIVISION Case 1:18-cv-00498-RP Document 1 Filed 06/13/18 Page 1 of 13 LISA COLE, Plaintiff, v. IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS AUSTIN DIVISION AMERICAN LEGION AUXILIARY DEPARTMENT

More information

In The Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas. No CV

In The Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas. No CV Affirmed; Opinion Filed January 10, 2018. In The Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas No. 05-17-00118-CV THOMAS J. GRANATA, II, Appellant V. MICHAEL KROESE AND JUSTIN HILL, Appellees On Appeal

More information

Brent Clark Perry Law Office of Brent C Perry 800 Commerce St Houston, TX 77002

Brent Clark Perry Law Office of Brent C Perry 800 Commerce St Houston, TX 77002 SANDEE BRYAN MARION CHIEF JUSTICE KAREN ANGELINI MARIALYN BARNARD REBECA C. MARTINEZ PATRICIA O. ALVAREZ LUZ ELENA D. CHAPA JASON PULLIAM JUSTICES COURT OF APPEALS FOURTH COURT OF APPEALS DISTRICT CADENA-REEVES

More information

Reversed and Rendered; and Opinion Filed January 16, In The Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas. No.

Reversed and Rendered; and Opinion Filed January 16, In The Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas. No. Reversed and Rendered; and Opinion Filed January 16, 2014 S In The Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas No. 05-12-00705-CV CITY OF DALLAS, Appellant V. BRIAN LONCAR, SUE LONCAR, ET AL., Appellees

More information

In The Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas. No CV. ROBERT R. COLE, JR., Appellant V. GWENDOLYN PARKER, INC.

In The Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas. No CV. ROBERT R. COLE, JR., Appellant V. GWENDOLYN PARKER, INC. AFFIRM; and Opinion Filed August 4, 2015. S In The Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas No. 05-13-01655-CV ROBERT R. COLE, JR., Appellant V. GWENDOLYN PARKER, INC., Appellee On Appeal from

More information

Fourth Court of Appeals San Antonio, Texas

Fourth Court of Appeals San Antonio, Texas Fourth Court of Appeals San Antonio, Texas MEMORANDUM OPINION No. 04-12-00771-CV David M. DUNLOP, Appellant v. John D. DELOACH, Individual, John David DeLoach d/b/a Bexar Towing, and 2455 Greenway Office

More information

NO CV IN THE COURT OF APPEALS FIFTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS AT DALLAS IN RE ESTATE OF MARIE A. MERKEL, DECEASED

NO CV IN THE COURT OF APPEALS FIFTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS AT DALLAS IN RE ESTATE OF MARIE A. MERKEL, DECEASED NO. 05-08-01615-CV IN THE COURT OF APPEALS FIFTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS AT DALLAS IN RE ESTATE OF MARIE A. MERKEL, DECEASED INDEPENDENT EXECUTOR, MATTHEW R. POLLARD Appellant v. RUPERT M. POLLARD Appellee From

More information

COURT OF APPEALS SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS FORT WORTH

COURT OF APPEALS SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS FORT WORTH COURT OF APPEALS SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS FORT WORTH NO. 2-08-175-CV ANNE BOENIG APPELLANT V. STARNAIR, INC. APPELLEE ------------ FROM THE 393RD DISTRICT COURT OF DENTON COUNTY ------------ OPINION ------------

More information

Court of Appeals. First District of Texas

Court of Appeals. First District of Texas Opinion issued October 31, 2013 In The Court of Appeals For The First District of Texas NO. 01-12-00954-CV REGINA THIBODEAUX, Appellant V. TOYS "R" US-DELAWARE, INC., Appellee On Appeal from the 269th

More information

TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN NO. 03-11-00592-CV Mark Polansky and Landrah Polansky, Appellants v. Pezhman Berenji and John Berenjy, Appellees 1 FROM THE COUNTY COURT AT LAW NO. 4 OF

More information

NO CV IN THE COURT OF APPEALS TWELFTH COURT OF APPEALS DISTRICT TYLER, TEXAS

NO CV IN THE COURT OF APPEALS TWELFTH COURT OF APPEALS DISTRICT TYLER, TEXAS NO. 12-08-00315-CV IN THE COURT OF APPEALS TWELFTH COURT OF APPEALS DISTRICT TYLER, TEXAS DOMINGA PALOMINO MENDOZA, APPEAL FROM THE 7TH INDIVIDUALLY, AND AS THE PERSONAL REPRESENTATIVE OF THE ESTATE OF

More information

Reverse and Render in part; Reverse and Remand; Opinion Filed April 4, In The Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

Reverse and Render in part; Reverse and Remand; Opinion Filed April 4, In The Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas Reverse and Render in part; Reverse and Remand; Opinion Filed April 4, 2014. S In The Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas No. 05-12-00777-CV DALLAS/FORT WORTH INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT BOARD,

More information

Page S.W.3d 544 (Tex.App.-Waco 2008)

Page S.W.3d 544 (Tex.App.-Waco 2008) Page 544 249 S.W.3d 544 (Tex.App.-Waco 2008) Debra KIRWAN, Individually and as Personal Representative of the Estate of Brad McGehee, Deceased, Appellant, v. CITY OF WACO, Appellee. No. 10-07-00123-CV.

More information

In The Court of Appeals Sixth Appellate District of Texas at Texarkana

In The Court of Appeals Sixth Appellate District of Texas at Texarkana In The Court of Appeals Sixth Appellate District of Texas at Texarkana No. 06-11-00015-CV LARRY SANDERS, Appellant V. DAVID WOOD, D/B/A WOOD ENGINEERING COMPANY, Appellee On Appeal from the County Court

More information

NO CV HOUSTON DIVISION LAWRENCE C. MATHIS, Appellant. vs. DCR MORTGAGE III SUB I, LLC, Appellee

NO CV HOUSTON DIVISION LAWRENCE C. MATHIS, Appellant. vs. DCR MORTGAGE III SUB I, LLC, Appellee NO. 14-15-00026-CV ACCEPTED 14-15-00026-CV FOURTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS HOUSTON, TEXAS 6/15/2015 7:55:45 PM CHRISTOPHER PRINE CLERK IN THE COURT OF APPEALS FILED IN FOR THE FOURTEENTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT

More information

In the Court of Appeals Second Appellate District of Texas at Fort Worth

In the Court of Appeals Second Appellate District of Texas at Fort Worth In the Court of Appeals Second Appellate District of Texas at Fort Worth No. 02-18-00072-CV AMERICAN HOMEOWNER PRESERVATION, LLC AND JORGE NEWBERY, Appellants V. BRIAN J. PIRKLE, Appellee On Appeal from

More information

TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN NO. 03-06-00584-CV Walter Young Martin III, Appellant v. Gehan Homes Ltd., Appellee FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF TRAVIS COUNTY, 98TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT NO.

More information

MEMORANDUM OPINION. No CV. KILLAM RANCH PROPERTIES, LTD., Appellant. WEBB COUNTY, TEXAS, Appellee

MEMORANDUM OPINION. No CV. KILLAM RANCH PROPERTIES, LTD., Appellant. WEBB COUNTY, TEXAS, Appellee MEMORANDUM OPINION No. 04-08-00105-CV KILLAM RANCH PROPERTIES, LTD., Appellant v. WEBB COUNTY, TEXAS, Appellee From the 341st Judicial District Court, Webb County, Texas Trial Court No. 2006-CVQ-001710-D3

More information

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS FIFTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS AT DALLAS. No CV. EVAN LANE VAN SHAW, Appellant. MID-CONTINENT CASUALTY CO.

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS FIFTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS AT DALLAS. No CV. EVAN LANE VAN SHAW, Appellant. MID-CONTINENT CASUALTY CO. IN THE COURT OF APPEALS FIFTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS AT DALLAS No. 05-10-00642-CV EVAN LANE VAN SHAW, Appellant v. MID-CONTINENT CASUALTY CO., Appellee TRIAL CAUSE NO. CC-09-08193-E ON APPEAL FROM THE COUNTY

More information

2018COA151. A division of the Colorado Court of Appeals considers the. district court s dismissal of a pretrial detainee s allegations that she

2018COA151. A division of the Colorado Court of Appeals considers the. district court s dismissal of a pretrial detainee s allegations that she The summaries of the Colorado Court of Appeals published opinions constitute no part of the opinion of the division but have been prepared by the division for the convenience of the reader. The summaries

More information

Court of Appeals. First District of Texas

Court of Appeals. First District of Texas Opinion issued November 26, 2014 In The Court of Appeals For The First District of Texas NO. 01-14-00946-CV WALLER COUNTY, TEXAS AND COUNTY JUDGE GLENN BECKENDORFF, COMMISSIONER FRANK POKLUDA, COMMISSIONER

More information