For the week of May 31, 2010, the Dallas Court of Appeals issued fifteen opinions in civil cases. Nine 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 six cases are as follows:
Foley v. Trinity Indus. Leasing Co. (05-09-01184-CV) – Recites well-established (1) standard of reviewing trail court’s ruling on a special appearance; (2) presumptions applicable when trial court does not file findings of fact; (3) rules governing shifting burdens of proof in special appearance context; (4) rules governing when Texas courts may assert personal jurisdiction over nonresident; and (5) rule governing application of alter ego principle.
Halmos v. Bombardier Aerospace Corp. (05-08-00865-CV) – Recites well-established (1) rule that jury instruction may not comment on weight of evidence; (2) standard of reviewing correctness of jury instruction; (3) principle of accord and satisfaction; (4) standard for reviewing directed verdict; (5) standard for reviewing legal sufficiency of evidence; (6) elements of breach of contract claim; (7) measure of damages for breach of contract; and (8) standard of reviewing trial court’s ruling that a party’s amended pleading may not be considered.
Ham v. Equity Residential Prop. Mgmt. Servs. Corp. (05-08-01297-CV) – Recites well-established (1) no-evidence summary judgment standard; (2) test for cause-in-fact; (3) rule governing conclusory opinions; and (4) spoliation rule.
In re Kiefer (05-10-00452-CV) – Recites well-established (1) standard for when mandamus relief is available; and (2) rule that mandamus is available when trial court refuses to either grant timely-filed recusal motion or to refer the motion to the presiding judge of the administrative district.
Texas Alcoholic Beverage Comm’n v. Cabanas (05-09-00126-CV) – Recites well-established standard for reviewing decisions of administrative agencies.
Wet-Line, L.L.C. v. Amazon Tours, Inc. (05-07-0156-CV) – Recites well-established (1) standard of reviewing trail court’s ruling on special appearance; and (2) rules governing when Texas courts may assert personal jurisdiction over nonresident.