TEXAS SUPREME COURT
PETITIONS FOR REVIEW DENIED
FEBRUARY 2008
PETITIONS FOR REVIEW DENIED
FEBRUARY 2008
2008 TEXAS SUPREME COURT
DECISIONS - DISPOSITIONS
PFRs DENIED IN 2008
Petitions for Review denied by Tex. Sup. Ct. in January 2008
Petitions for Review denied by Tex. Sup. Ct. in February 2008
Petitions for Review denied by Tex. Sup. Ct. in March 2008
Petitions for Review denied by Tex. Sup. Ct. in April 2008
Petitions for Review denied by Tex. Sup. Ct. in May 2008
Petitions for Review denied by Tex. Sup. Ct. in June 2008
Petitions for Review denied by the Texas Supreme Court July 2008
Petitions for Review denied by the Texas Supreme Court August 2008
Petitions for Review denied by the Texas Supreme Court in September 2008
Petitions for Review denied by the Texas Supreme Court in October 2008
Petitions for Review denied by the Texas Supreme Court in November 2008
Petitions for Review denied by the Texas Supreme Court in December 2008
Most recent Petitions for Review denied by the Texas Supreme Court
FEBRUARY 2008 PFR DENIALS
Petitions for Review Denied by
the Texas Supreme Court February 29, 2008
07-0964
STAN HUNT v. AMALIA RODRIGUEZ-MENDOZA; from Travis County; 3rd district
(03-06-00117-CV, ___ SW3d ___, 08-29-07, pet. denied Feb 2008)(prisoner inmate litigation)
We withdraw our opinion dated July 11, 2007, and substitute the following in its place. We overrule Hunt's
motion for rehearing.
Stan Hunt appeals from the district court's dismissal of his lawsuit against Travis County District Clerk Amalia
Rodriguez-Mendoza for failure to comply with chapter 14 of the civil practice and remedies code, which governs
inmate litigation. See Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code Ann. §§ 14.001-.014 (West 2002). In four issues on appeal,
Hunt claims that he was denied his right to a hearing on the dismissal, alleges that the district court interfered
with his compliance with the statute, asserts that the district court abused its discretion in ordering the
dismissal, and contends that his case should not have been dismissed with prejudice. We reform the judgment
to reflect that the dismissal was without prejudice. As reformed, we affirm.
07-0979 ALLEN R. HARTMAN & LISA HARTMAN v. HARRIS COUNTY APPRAISAL DISTRICT AND THE
APPRAISAL REVIEW BOARD OF THE HARRIS COUNTY APPRAISAL DISTRICT; from Harris County; 1st district
(01-06-01074-CV, ___ SW3d ___, 10-11-07, pet. denied Feb. 2008)(tax protest case, judicial review)
Appellants, Allen R Hartman and Lisa Hartman, sued appellees, Harris County Appraisal District (HCAD) and
the Appraisal Review Board of the Harris County Appraisal District (HCARB), alleging that their real property
was appraised excessively and unequally for tax year 2005. Appellees moved for summary judgment, asserting
that the appraised value was the result of an agreement between the parties and, therefore, under section
1.111(e) of the Tax Code, could not be contested in a judicial appeal. The trial court granted appellees' motion
and rendered judgment in their favor. In a single point of error, the Hartmans contend that the trial court erred
in rendering summary judgment for three reasons: (1) there was no agreement reached between the parties;
(2) the valuation was determined by HCARB, giving the Hartmans a statutory right to appeal under section
42.01of the Tax Code; and (3) the Hartmans' due-process rights were violated by the application of section
1.111(e) of the Tax Code by denying their right to a judicial appeal. We affirm.
07-0980 VALERIE BRYAN v. DR. DENTON WATUMULL; from Dallas County; 5th district
(05-06-00018-CV, 230 SW3d 503, 07-24-07, pet. denied Feb. 2008)(med mal suit)
Valerie Bryan appeals an adverse medical malpractice jury verdict in favor of Dr. Denton Watumull. In seven
issues, she argues jury charge error, legal and factual sufficiency, improper exclusion of evidence, and
erroneous dismissal of certain claims. For the reasons stated below, we affirm the trial court's judgment.
07-1002 JOHN SPOOR, SUSAN LYNN SPOOR, AND CLAUDINE SPOOR, INDIVIDUALLY AND AS
INDEPENDENT EXECUTRIX OF THE ESTATE OF DONALD EUGENE SPOOR, DECEASED v. SOUTHTEX 66
PIPELINE COMPANY, LTD.; from Brazoria County; 14th district (14-05-01181-CV, 238 SW3d 538, 10-23-07,
pet. denied Feb. 2008)(UDJA, easement, trespass to try title)
08-0001 JOHN OCIE ROBERTS v. ELEANOR CARTE, ESTATE OF A.C. CARTE, BY AND THROUGH ITS
EXECUTRIX, CELESTE BOWMAN AND JAVIER GONZALEZ; from Cameron County; 13th district
(13-04-00566-CV, ___ SW3d ___, 11-15-07, pet. denied Feb. 2008) (pro se litigants, jurisdictional dismissal)
Appellant, John Ocie Roberts, proceeding pro se, attempts to appeal a summary judgment rendered against
him. After reviewing the record and briefing, we affirm in part and dismiss in part for want of jurisdiction.
08-0038 DEPUTY SHERIFF'S ASSOCIATION OF BEXAR COUNTY v. TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC
SAFETY AND COL. THOMAS A. DAVIS, JR.; from Bexar County; 4th district (04-07-00233-CV, ___ SW3d ___,
11-14-07, pet. denied Feb 2008)(claim not ripe, ripeness, standing, UDJA, declaratory judgment)
This interlocutory appeal arises from the trial court's denial of the Texas Department of Public Safety's
(Department) plea to the jurisdiction and motion to dismiss. Deputy Sheriff's Association of Bexar County
(Association) sought a declaratory judgment against the Department that certain deputies were peace officers
for purposes of Section 1702.322 of the Texas Occupation Code. They also sought an injunction against
Colonel Thomas Davis, Jr. precluding him from applying or enforcing Section 1702.322 against the
Association's members. See Tex. Occ. Code Ann. § 1702.322 (Vernon 2004). The Department asserts the trial
court lacked jurisdiction because (1) civil equity courts cannot enjoin the enforcement of criminal statutes; (2)
the Association lacked standing; (3) the Association's claims are premature and precluded under the ripeness
doctrine; and (4) the Association's claims are barred by sovereign immunity. (1)
Because the Association's claims are barred by the ripeness doctrine, we reverse the trial court's order on the
plea to the jurisdiction and motion to dismiss and render judgment that the Association's claims for declaratory
and injunctive relief against the Department and Davis are dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.
08-0040 BROGAN, LTD., A PARTNERSHIP, AND TINA MARIE BROGAN v. W. CHARLES BROGAN, III, M.D.,
PH.D., P.A., A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION, AND WALTER CHARLES BROGAN, III, INDIVIDUALLY; from
Lubbock County; 7th district (07-05-00290-CV, ___ SW3d ___, 10-11-07, pet. denied Feb. 2008) (partnership
dispute, breach of contract, tort, promissory estoppel)
Appellants, Brogan Ltd. and Tina Marie Brogan, appeal from a judgment rendered in favor of W. Charles
Brogan III, M.D., Ph.D., P.A., a Professional Corporation (Brogan P.A.), and Walter Charles Brogan, III,
individually, (Dr. Brogan), in a breach of contract and tort action related to their partnership interests in Brogan
Ltd. Appellants assert three issues: (1) they are entitled to judgment as a matter of law denying Dr. Brogan's
claim for capital contributions in 2003; (2) they are entitled to a new trial because no jury question was
submitted to determine the correctness of the partners' capital accounts and/or Dr. Brogan's capital
contribution in 2003; and (3) the trial court erred in granting Appellees' motion for a directed verdict on
Appellants' promissory estoppel claim. We affirm.
Petitions for Review Denied February 22, 2008
THE FOLLOWING PETITIONS FOR REVIEW ARE DENIED:
07-0042 JULIE HOBBS v. KATHLEEN VAN STAVERN; from Galveston County; 1st district
(01-05-00632-CV, ___ SW3d ___, 11-02-06, pet. denied Feb 2008)(family law, SAPCR, same sex relationship,
adoption, standing as parent)
07-0063 DARLETA ROCHELLE JOHNSON, INDIVIDUALLY AND AS REPRESENTATIVE OF THE ESTATE OF
BRAD F. JOHNSON, SR., DECEASED, AND AS NEXT FRIEND OF BRAD JOHNSON, JR., JERELLE JOHNSON
AND AMETHYST JOHNSON, MINORS v. TRANSIT MIX CONCRETE & MATERIALS COMPANY AND TRINITY
MATERIALS, INC.; from Jefferson County; 11th district (11-03-00300-CV, ___ SW3d ___,10-12-06, pet. denied
Feb 2008) (wrongful death, workplace injury)
In 1999, Brad Johnson Sr. was killed while working at a sand and gravel mine owned and operated by Trinity
Materials, Inc. and Transit Mix Concrete & Materials Company.[1] Darletta Rochelle Johnson, individually and
as representative of the estate of her husband Brad F. Johnson Sr. and as next friend of the three minor
children, Brad Johnson Jr., Jerelle Johnson, and Amethyst Johnson, filed suit against Trinity under the
Wrongful Death Act, Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code Ann. '' 71.001 B .012 (Vernon 1997 & Supp.2006), and the
Texas Survival Statute, Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code Ann. ' 71.021 (Vernon 1997). The jury found Trinity
negligent and awarded Johnson's estate and survivors $164 million in damages. In its final judgment, the trial
court remitted the award to $27,357,090.83. We reverse and render.
07-0117 STATE STREET BANK AND TRUST COMPANY v. TEXAS SOUTHERN UNIVERSITY; (Dissenting
Opinion by Justice Keyes) from Harris County; 1st district (01-05-00758-CV, 212 SW3d 893, 01-11-07, pet.
denied Feb 2008) (Justice O'Neill not sitting)(sovereign immunity, waiver by conduct approved,
lawsuits against universities)
07-0303 ELIZABETH GOODSON v. ADELINA CASTELLANOS; from Williamson County; 3rd district
(03-04-00335-CV, 214 SW3d 741, 01-19-07, pet. denied Feb 2008)(family law, international adoption)
Elizabeth Goodson traveled to Kazakstan to adopt K.G. After returning from Kazakstan, Goodson and her
girlfriend, Adelina Castellanos, filed a joint petition to adopt K.G. in Bexar County, and a district court granted
the adoption. Subsequent to the adoption, the relationship between Goodson and Castellanos ended, and
Castellanos filed a suit affecting the parent-child relationship. After a trial, the district court entered an order
appointing Castellanos as the sole managing conservator of K.G. and ordered Goodson to pay attorney’s fees
and child support. Goodson appeals the judgment of the district court. We will affirm the judgment of the
district court in part and reverse and remand in part.
Because we have concluded that (1) the adoption decree is not void, (2) the time to attack the decree has
passed, (3) Goodson was not entitled to a parental presumption over Castellanos, (4) the district court did not
improperly violate Goodson’s right to the care of her child by appointing a nonparent as the sole managing
conservator of K.G., (5) the district court did not abuse its discretion by excluding evidence concerning
Castellanos’s brother or by ordering Goodson to pay child support, (6) the district court did not err in the
amount of child support ordered, and (7) Goodson failed to preserve her complaint concerning the manner in
which the attorney’s fees were ordered or the amount of postjudgment interest ordered, we affirm the portion of
the district court’s judgment appointing Castellanos as sole managing conservator and Goodson as
possessory conservator and requiring Goodson to pay child support and attorney’s fees to Castellanos.
However, because we concluded that the amount of attorney’s fees ordered to be paid to the amicus attorney
was not supported by sufficient evidence, we reverse and remand this case for further proceedings consistent
with this opinion
07-0677 METROCARE EMS, L.P. v. STATE OF TEXAS, OFFICE OF THE GOVERNOR DIVISION OF
EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT AND TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF STATE HEALTH SERVICES; from Jefferson
County; 9th district (09-07-00010-CV, ___ SW3d ___, 06-07-07, pet denied Feb. 2008)
(governmental entities, sovereign immunity)
From all of the above-discussed jurisdictional evidence, we conclude that MetroCare's declaratory judgment
action is, in fact, a suit against the State for purported contractual reimbursement for which the State has not
waived sovereign immunity. We further conclude that MetroCare has failed to plead and prove the appropriate
requisite intent so as to raise a fact question on whether the State engaged in a "taking" of any MetroCare-
owned property under its eminent domain powers. See Miranda, 133 S.W.3d at 227-28. Because an eminent-
domain type of taking by the State has not been shown, the State is not subject to suit under article I, section
17 of the Texas Constitution. The trial court erred in denying the State's plea to the jurisdiction. Therefore, we
reverse the trial court's order denying the State's plea to the jurisdiction and dismiss the cause for lack of
jurisdiction.
07-0825 MARCIE MCCARTHY v. WANI VENTURE, A.S. SUCCESSOR IN INTEREST TO NORGIPS USA, INC.;
from Harris County; 1st district (01-04-00921-CV, ___ SW3d ___, 06-28-07, pet. denied Feb. 2008) (fraud,
corporate veil)
07-0874 SHADY CREEK HOUSING PARTNERS, LIMITED v. HELM COMPANIES; from Harris County; 1st
district (01-05-00743-CV, ___ SW3d ___, 07-26-07, pet. denied Feb. 2008)
Appellant, Kingwood Equities, Inc., d/b/a Helm Companies ("Kingwood"), (1) sued appellee, Shady Creek
Housing Partners, Ltd. ("Shady Creek Partners"), for "knowing participation in a breach of fiduciary duty,"
conversion, and theft. In two issues, Kingwood contends that the trial court erred by granting a no-evidence
summary judgment in favor of Shady Creek Partners because (1) Kingwood presented evidence to support its
claim that Shady Creek Partners knowingly participated in a breach of fiduciary duty and (2) Shady Creek
Partners abused the discovery process.
We reverse the trial court's summary judgment in favor of Shady Creek Partners on Kingwood's claim of
"knowing participation in a breach of fiduciary duty" and remand the cause. We affirm the trial court's summary
judgment in all other respects.
07-0916 ORION REFINING CORPORATION v. UOP, A GENERAL PARTNERSHIP; UOP, LLC; EM SECTOR
HOLDINGS, INC.; AND CATALYSTS, ADSORBENTS AND PROCESS SYSTEMS, INC.; from Harris County; 1st
district (01-05-00681-CV, ___ SW3d ___, 10-04-07, pet. denied Feb 2008)(breach of contract, foreign state
law)
07-0930 DANIEL GENE CALDWELL v. CARROLLTON AIR CONDITIONING, INC.; from Denton County; 7th
district (07-05-00241-CV, ___ SW3d ___, 08-22-07, pet denied Feb. 2008) (DTPA, misrepresentation,
negligence, BoC, conversion, spoliation)
Appellant Daniel Gene Caldwell (Caldwell) appeals from a take-nothing summary judgment granted in favor of
appellee Carrollton Air Conditioning, Inc. (Carrollton). Caldwell sued Carrollton for injuries allegedly received
from carbon monoxide poisoning as a result of a defective furnace serviced by Carrollton. Caldwell raises
sixteen issues on appeal related to 1) the propriety of granting summary judgment with respect to his claims of
negligence, DTPA violations, breach of contract, negligent misrepresentation, and conversion, 2) whether he
should have been granted a presumption of spoliation of evidence, 3) whether the trial court erred in
sustaining objections to his summary judgment evidence, and 4) whether the trial court erred in refusing to
consider his supplemental/new summary judgment evidence submitted after the summary judgment hearing but
before the court's ruling. We affirm the summary judgment.
07-0935 MICHAEL FAWZY WISSA, M.D. v. MARK VOOSEN, KAREN VOOSEN, AND MARY ELIZABETH
("EMMY") VOOSEN; from Bexar County; 4th district (04-07-00386-CV, ___ SW3d ___, 09-26-07, pet. denied
Feb. 2008) (Med-Mal suit, ILA, motion to dismiss)
In this interlocutory appeal, we are asked to determine if the trial court abused its discretion when it denied Dr.
Michael Wissa's motion to dismiss the underlying medical malpractice suit against him. Finding no error, we
affirm the trial court's order.
07-0957 BOB J. HERRIN M.D. v. THE MEDICAL PROTECTIVE COMPANY; from Harrison County; 6th district
(06-06-00048-CV, 235 SW3d 866, 10-03-07, pet. denied Feb. 2008) (DTPA, attorneys fees)
After a trial on the merits of his lawsuit, a nonunanimous jury returned a verdict in favor of Dr. Bob J. Herrin
against The Medical Protective Company, Herrin's former malpractice insurer. That verdict specifically found
Medical Protective had violated the Texas Deceptive Trade Practices Act (DTPA) and awarded $100,000.00 in
damages for Medical Protective's "knowing" violation of the DTPA. The jury further found Medical Protective
had defrauded Herrin and awarded him $250,000.00 on that claim. Additionally, the jury awarded attorney's
fees.
Medical Protective now appeals the jury's verdict, raising a plethora of appellate issues. We find merit in two of
the issues raised by Medical Protective and, for the reasons stated below, we sustain those points of error and
reverse the trial court's judgment, rendering a take-nothing judgment in favor of Medical Protective.
07-0965 PENNY TRESA MCMENNAMY v. CURTIS MCMENNAMY; from Hunt County; 5th district
(05-06-01566-CV, ___ SW3d ___, 10-10-07, pet. denied Feb. 2008)(collateral attack on probate court
judgment, probate cases)
07-0967 FRED STEPHENS AND BETTY STEPHENS v. GEORGIA-PACIFIC CORPORATION; from Brazoria
County; 1st district (01-05-00132-CV, 239 SW3d 304, 08-13-07, pet. denied Feb. 2008))(workplace injury,
asbestos, proof of causation, expert testimony, jury award reversed, take-nothing judgment rendered)
07-1014 JUDY ALLEN, ET AL. v. UNITED OF OMAHA LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY, ET AL.; from Tarrant
County; 2nd district (02-06-00187-CV, 236 SW3d 315, 05-17-07, pet. denied Feb 2008) (Justice Hecht not
sitting) (insurance law, beneficiary of life insurance)
This is a dispute over the proceeds of a key man life insurance policy. The principal question before us is this:
When a policy's named beneficiary merges with another entity, and the other entity is the "surviving company,"
are the policy proceeds payable to the surviving company? We answer in the affirmative, and we affirm the
trial court's judgment
07-1015 REGENT CARE CENTER OF LAREDO, LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, D/B/A REGENT CARE CENTER
LAREDO AND PAMELA HUMPHREY v. MARIA D. ABREGO, BERTA VILLARREAL, BEATRIZ HERNANDEZ,
RAUL HERNANDEZ, JR., HOMERO PEREZ, AND DAVID PEREZ, INDIVIDUALLY AND AS REPRESENTATIVES
AND LEGAL HEIRS OF THE ESTATE OF MAGDALENA PEREZ, DECEASED; from Webb County; 4th district
(04-07-00320-CV, ___ SW3d ___, 10-24-07, pet denied Feb 2008) (HCLC, ILA, expert report)
This is an interlocutory appeal in a health care liability case. A nursing home facility, Regent Care Center of
Laredo, and its administrator, Pamela Humphrey, (collectively "RCCL"), challenge the trial court's denial of their
motion to dismiss under section 74.351 of the Texas Civil Practice and Remedies Code. RCCL asserts the trial
court abused its discretion in denying their motion to dismiss because the expert reports offered by appellees
Maria Abrego, Berta Villarreal, Beatriz Hernandez, Raul Hernandez, Jr., Homero Perez, and David Perez,
Individually and as Representatives and Legal Heirs of the Estate of Magdalena Perez, Deceased (collectively
"the Abregos") fail to establish a causal relationship between RCCL's alleged breaches of the applicable
standards of care and the death of Magdalena Perez. Because the Abregos' expert reports are sufficient as to
the issue of causation, we affirm.
07-1052 GALVESTON CENTRAL APPRAISAL DISTRICT AND GALVESTON CENTRAL APPRAISAL REVIEW
BOARD v. MHCB (USA) LEASING AND FINANCE CORP. AND VALERO TEXAS-REFINING, L.P.; from Galveston
County; 1st district (01-06-00529-CV, ___ SW3d ___, 09-20-07, pet. denied Feb 2008)
(property tax appraisal, refinery, plea to the jurisdiction, declaratory judgment, UDJA)
07-1060 LHR ENTERPRISES, INC.; TASK SERVICES INC.; HARRY SEWILL; RICK CHAPMAN; AND
TRANSGLOBAL MORTGAGE, INC. v. MIKE GEESLIN, IN HIS OFFICIAL CAPACITY AS COMMISSIONER OF
INSURANCE FOR THE STATE OF TEXAS; TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF INSURANCE; AND STATE OFFICE OF
ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS FOR THE STATE OF TEXAS; from Travis County; 3rd district
(03-05-00176-CV, ___ SW3d ___, 11-07-07, pet. denied Feb. 2008)
08-0034 CARL R. DAILY v. BOWIE COUNTY APPRAISAL DISTRICT; from Bowie County; 6th district
(06-07-00055-CV, ___ SW3d ___, 11-28-07, pet. denied Feb 2008) (tax appraisal protest appeal)
Carl R. Daily appealed a determination of the tax evaluations placed on his properties by the Bowie County
Appraisal District (Bowie CAD) as ratified by the Bowie County Appraisal Review Board. After a trial before the
court, he was granted partial relief by the trial judge (1) and appeals the sufficiency of the relief and the finding
denying him other relief. We affirm the judgment.
Daily, appearing pro se, first attempted to file an appellant's brief, which was rejected as far too lengthy, and he
was ordered to re-brief; he subsequently filed a shorter brief which, for the most part, is disorganized,
confusing, and extraordinarily difficult to comprehend. Likewise, at trial, it is almost impossible to determine
from the record at which point Daily abandons the role of his own advocate and attempts to assume the role of
a witness. The Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure require an appellant's brief to contain "a clear and concise
argument for the contentions made, with appropriate citations to authorities and to the record." Tex. R. App. P.
38.1(h). On appeal, as at trial, the pro se appellant must properly present his case. Plummer v. Reeves, 93 S.
W.3d 930, 931 (Tex. App.--Amarillo 2003, pet. denied); Karen Corp. v. Burlington N. and Sante Fe Ry. Co.,
107 S.W.3d 118, 125 (Tex. App.--Fort Worth 2003, pet. denied). A pro se litigant is obligated to comport with
the Rules of Procedure just as one represented by an attorney is required to comply with them. Holt v. F.F.
Enters., 990 S.W.2d 756, 759 (Tex. App.--Amarillo 1998, pet. denied).
Nevertheless, in the interest of justice, to the extent that we are able to glean the nature of Daily's complaints,
we attempt to address them.
08-0035 JOAN CAROL ELLIS ROBERTS v. DR. MILAS ELDON DAVIS, JR.; from Titus County; 6th district
(06-07-00024-CV, ___ SW3d ___, 11-01-07) (defamation, libel, limitations)
Joan Carol Ellis Roberts appeals from a trial in which a jury determined that her underlying claim of libel against
Dr. Milas Eldon Davis, Jr., was barred by limitations. In this case, Roberts alleged that Davis libeled her in a
letter dated April 9, 2001, this letter having been written by Davis to Roberts' immediate supervisor, George
Burns, in which he complained about Davis' job behavior and performance. Roberts alleged that Davis' letter
was much more widely published and that it contained untrue and defamatory statements about her personal
and professional behavior at the hospital.
Petitions for Review Denied February 15, 2008
ORDERS ON PETITIONS FOR REVIEW
THE FOLLOWING PETITIONS FOR REVIEW ARE DENIED:
06-0266 JNC PARTNERS DENTON, LLC v. CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS; from Denton County; 2nd district
(02-05-00439-CV, 190 SW3d 790, 03-23-06, pet. denied Feb. 2008) stay order issued April 6, 2006, lifted
(temporary injunction appeal, city annexation plan, arbitration)
Appellant JNC Partners Denton, LLC appeals from the trial court's denial of its request for a temporary
injunction enjoining Appellee City of Denton from annexing JNC's property. The underlying issue is whether
JNC has shown a probable right to compel arbitration under section 43.052(i) of the local government code.
See Tex. Loc. Gov't Code Ann. ' 43.052(i) (Vernon Supp. 2005). We affirm the trial court's order denying the
temporary injunction.
JNC presented no evidence that tended to show that Denton proposed to annex two or more areas as
described in section 43.052(h). Thus, JNC failed to prove a probable right to arbitration under section 43.052
(i). We therefore hold that the trial court did not abuse its discretion by denying JNC's request for a temporary
injunction.
06-0975 GRANT THORNTON LLP v. PROSPECT HIGH INCOME FUND, ML CBO IV (CAYMAN), LTD., PAMCO
CAYMAN, LTD., PAM CAPITAL FUNDING, L.P., HIGHLAND CRUSADER FUND, LTD., AND PCMG TRADING
PARTNERS VII, L.P.; from Dallas County; 5th district (05-05-00092-CV, 203 SW3d 602, 10-18-06, pet. denied
Feb 2008) (claims for negligence and third-party beneficiary breach of contract, partial reversal)
07-0111 T H INVESTMENTS, INC. v. KIRBY INLAND MARINE, L.P. AND PORT OF HOUSTON AUTHORITY OF
HARRIS COUNTY, TEXAS; from Harris County; 14th district (14-05-00204-CV, 218 SW3d 173, 02-01-07, pet
denied Feb 2008)(land dispute, real property, river, tides, takings)
07-0199 COLIN J. SULLIVAN AND HENRY LUCIO v. PHILLIP K. POTEET, INDIVIDUALLY AND AS NEXT
FRIEND FOR JEFFREY POTEET, A MINOR; from Denton County; 2nd district (02-05-00338-CV, 218 SW3d
780, 02-01-07, pet. denied Feb 2008) 2 petitions (break-up of nonmarital relationship, 1983 claims against
officers stemming from incident re dispute over property division)(pet. for certiorari filed)
07-0277 and 07-0278
LUCILLE R. KELLEY v. TEXAS WORKFORCE COMMISSION, DIANE R. RATH, CHAIR, RON LEHMAN,
COMMISSIONER, RONALD G. CONGLETON, COMMISSIONER HUMBLE INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT,
DR. MARY WIDMIER AND ALICIA BOSTON-MACE; from Harris County; 1st district (01-05-01109-CV, ___
SW3d ___, 12-28-06, pet. denied Feb. 2008)(jurisdiction, suit for judicial review of benefits denial must be
timely filed and must name employer)
07-0411 TEXAS STATE BANK, TRUSTEE OF THE GUERRA MINERAL TRUSTS, ET AL v. EL PASO OIL AND
GAS U.S.A., L.P., ET AL; from Starr County; 4th district (04-05-00673-CV, ___ SW3d ___, 03-14-07, pet.
denied Feb 2008)
07-0673 CITY OF ARLINGTON, TEXAS AND THE LICENSE AND AMORTIZATION APPEAL BOARD OF THE
CITY OF ARLINGTON v. CENTERFOLDS, INC. AND STEVEN WILLIAM CRAFT; from Tarrant County; 2nd
district (02-06-00080-CV, 232 SW3d 238, 06-14-07, pet denied Feb 2008)
07-0678 JONATHAN SCOTT MICKLETHWAIT v. MARINA KARITQNOVA MICKLETHWAIT; from Travis County;
3rd district (03-06-00500-CV, ___ SW3d ___, 06-27-07, pet denied Feb 2008)(marriage divorce, alien
spouses, child support, property division)
In this appeal from a final divorce decree, Jonathan S. Micklethwait challenges the trial court's discretion in
determining the amount of child support payment and the division of marital property, and its failure to prohibit
Jonathan's former spouse, Marina Karitznova Micklethwait, from driving with their child in the car or from
international travel with the child. We affirm the judgment.
07-0680 IN THE INTEREST OF J.G., A CHILD; from Titus County; 6th district (06-06-00114-CV, ___ SW3d
___, 06-13-07, pet. denied Feb 2008)
07-0734 THE CITY OF CARROLLTON v. CRAIG B. SINGER AND CAROL G. SINGER; from Denton County;
2nd district (02-06-00322-CV, ___ SW3d ___, 08-02-07, pet denied Feb 2008)(with dissent) (immunity claim
rejected)
This is an appeal from the trial court=s denial of appellant the City of Carrollton=s plea to the jurisdiction on
governmental immunity grounds. In its sole issue, the City contends that it is entitled to immunity from the
breach of contract claims brought by appellees Craig B. and Carol G. Singer. The question we must answer is
whether, by contracting with the Singers to perform certain improvements in exchange for their deed of a
portion of their property for the City=s use as a roadway, the City entered into a settlement agreement of an
eminent domain claim, thereby submitting to the trial court=s jurisdiction under the Texas Constitution and the
reasoning of Texas A&M University-Kingsville v. Lawson, 87 S.W.3d 518 (Tex. 2002). We conclude that it did.
We therefore affirm the trial court=s denial of the City=s plea to the jurisdiction.
07-0752 B.H. MCCAIG v. TRESSIE MCCAIG; from Henderson County; 12th district
(12-06-00374-CV, ___ SW3d ___, 06-20-07, pet. denied Feb 2008)
07-0766 SOUTHERN INSURANCE COMPANY v. MICHAEL BREWSTER; from Harris County; 1st district
(01-06-00029-CV, ___ SW3d ___, 07-06-07, pet. denied Feb 2008)
Appellant, Southern Insurance Company, sought judicial review in the trial court of a decision of the appeals
panel of the Texas Workers' Compensation Commission (TWCC). (1) On modified de novo review, the trial
court resolved cross-motions for traditional summary judgment to confirm the duty imposed on Southern to pay
benefits to appellee, Michael Brewster. (2) Southern (the carrier) provides worker's compensation insurance
coverage to Brewster's employer, Spectrum Corporation. Brewster is a service technician for Spectrum (the
employer), which installs and repairs electronic scoreboards for sports stadiums. The carrier and Brewster filed
cross-motions for summary judgment, and the carrier brings this appeal to challenge the summary judgment
rendered in favor of Brewster. Brewster has filed a motion to dismiss the appeal for want of jurisdiction, which
has been ordered taken with this case. We deny the motion to dismiss and affirm.
07-0791 STERLING CHEMICALS, INC. v. PRAXAIR, INC.; from Galveston County; 7th district
(07-05-00156-CV, ___ SW3d ___, 05-24-06, pet denied Feb 2008)
07-0793 MARTHA MARIA MARTINEZ, M.D. v. LARRY MARTINEZ AND SUSIE STEPHANIE CAMPOS; from
Cameron County; 13th district (13-05-00736-CV, ___ SW3d ___, 08-16-07, pet. denied Feb 2008)
07-0795 MYREX INDUSTRIES v. SURETEC INSURANCE COMPANY; from Jefferson County; 9th district
(09-06-00433-CV, 232 SW3d 811, 08-16-07)
07-0821 TEXAS TECH UNIVERSITY HEALTH SCIENCES CENTER v. RICKY LUCERO AND LARRY LUCERO,
SURVIVORS AND HEIRS AT LAW OF PATRICIA LUCERO, DECEDENT AND THE ESTATE OF PATRICIA
LUCERO; from El Paso County; 8th district (08-05-00297-CV, ___ SW3d ___, 08-02-07, pet. denied Feb 2008)
07-0867 APPARAJAN GANESAN v. CLAUDIA REEVES, DAVID FORREST, SUZY CHILES, JOHN DOE/JANE
DOE; from Johnson County; 10th district (10-07-00175-CV, 236 SW3d 816, 08-22-07, pet. denied Feb 2008)
We hold that Rule 27.1 does not require this Court to docket and hold an appeal open until there is an
appealable judgment or order at some future date. Because there is no question that there is no appealable
judgment or order in this proceeding, this appeal is dismissed.
07-0900 LARRY RAY TAYLOR v. LULA M. TAYLOR; from Tarrant County; 2nd district (02-05-00435-CV, ___
SW3d ___, 08-31-07, pet. denied Feb 2008) (divorce appeal, property division)
07-0905 EDUARDO P. LENTINO M.D., INDIVIDUALLY, EDUARDO P. LENTINO M.D., ASSIGNEE OF JORGE A.
LENTINO M.D. AND MARTA A. LENTINO v. FROST NATIONAL BANK F/K/A CULLEN CENTER BANK AND
TRUST; from Harris County; 14th district (14-05-01179-CV, ___ SW3d ___, 08-02-07, pet. denied Feb 2008)
(bill of review, pro se litigation)
In this equitable bill of review proceeding, pro se appellants, Eduardo P. Lentino, M.D., individually and as
assignee of Jorge A. Lentino, M.D., and Marta A. Lentino (collectively referred to as appellants) appeal the trial
court's denial of their motion for summary judgment and the trial court's granting of appellee, Frost National
Bank f/k/a Cullen Center Bank and Trust's, motion for summary judgment. We affirm.
07-0909 MATTHEW BRZOZOWSKI v. SOUTHEAST BAPTIST HOSPITAL & DR. MANIFOLD; from Bexar
County; 4th district (04-07-00031-CV, ___ SW3d ___, 10-17-07, pet. denied Feb 2008)(HCLC, no report)
as amended
Matthew Brzozowski appeals the trial court's order dismissing the underlying lawsuit based on Brzozowski's
failure to timely file an expert report as required by Chapter 74 of the Texas Civil Practice and Remedies Code
("Code"). Because Brzozowski's claims are health care liability claims and Brzozowski failed to preserve his
complaint of inadequate notice for our review, we affirm the trial court's order.
07-0936 JAMES N. MEADOR AND MELISSA A. MEADOR v. EMC MORTGAGE CORPORATION; from Bell
County; 7th district (07-07-00058-CV, 236 SW3d 451, 09-24-07, pet. denied Feb 2008)
James N. Meador and Melissa A. Meador (the Meadors) appeal from a summary judgment granted in favor of
EMC Mortgage Corporation (EMC) and the denial of their own motion for summary judgment. They had sought
a judgment declaring that the principal and interest on an unsecured loan owned by EMC should be forfeited
because the loan transaction failed to comply with the homestead lien provisions in the Texas Constitution,
Tex. Const. art. XVI, §50. We affirm the summary judgment.
08-0004 LYLE AND DEBORAH HODGE v. DALLAS CENTRAL APPRAISAL DISTRICT; from Dallas County; 5th
district (05-06-01418-CV, ___ SW3d ___, 11-19-07, pet. denied Feb 2008) )(property tax appeal, homestead
exemption)
Petitions for Review Denied on February 8, 2008
THE FOLLOWING PETITIONS FOR REVIEW ARE DENIED:
07-0621 IN THE INTEREST OF D.N.C., A CHILD; from Harris County; 1st district
(01-04-01232-CV, 227 SW3d 799, 12-21-06)
- consolidated with -
07-0622 IN THE INTEREST OF T.L.J. AND T.B.J., CHILDREN; from Harris County; 1st district
(01-04-01233-CV, 227 SW3d 799, 12-21-06)
- consolidated with -
07-0623 IN THE INTEREST OF T.J.C. AND T.D.C., CHILDREN; from Harris County; 1st district
(01-05-00124-CV, 227 SW3d 799, 12-21-06)
- consolidated with -
07-0624 IN THE INTEREST OF E.D.C., A CHILD; from Harris County; 1st district
(01-05-00126-CV, 227 SW3d 799, 12-21-06)
- consolidated with -
07-0625 IN THE INTEREST OF J.D.M., A CHILD; from Harris County; 1st district
(01-05-00127-CV, 227 SW3d 799, 12-21-06)
Per Curiam Opinion
07-0762 CATHY BURGESS v. MOHAMMAD FEGHHI; from Smith County; 12th district (12-04-00367-CV, ___
SW3d ___, 07-31-07, pet denied Feb 2008) as redrafted
07-0912 C.J. HATTEN, MATHEW HATTEN, CRAIG HATTEN, AND KIM HATTEN v. UNIVERSITY
INTERSCHOLASTIC LEAGUE AND WILLIAM FARNEY, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR; from Travis County; 13th
district (13-06-00313-CV, ___ SW3d ___, 09-2-07, pet denied Feb 2008)
07-0939 DASHUN HATCHER v. TDCJ-ID; from Anderson County; 6th district
(06-07-00046-CV, 232 SW3d 921, 09-04-07, pet denied Feb 2008)
07-0971 ATASCOCITA/BOONE JV, HOUSTON REAL ESTATE GROUP, INC. AND SHERRY HARBER v. EL
SABOR DE MI TIERRA, INC. D/B/A EL SABOR DE MEXICO; from Harris County; 14th district
(14-06-00652-CV, ___ SW3d ___, 08-28-07, pet. denied Feb 2008)(corrected opinion
by Hedges)(commercial lease)
07-0974 ERICA BANKS AND RONALD BANKS, INDIVIDUALLY, AND AS NEXT FRIENDS OF RONALD BANKS,
JR., A MINOR v. COLUMBIA HOSPITAL OF MEDICAL CITY DALLAS SUBSIDIARY LP, D/B/A MEDICAL CITY
DALLAS HOSPITAL; from Dallas County; 5th district (05-05-00935-CV, ___ SW3d ___, 07-12-07, pet denied
Feb 2008)(med-mal jury verdict for defendant)
Appellants Ronald and Erica Banks appeal from a take nothing judgment following a jury trial in their medical
malpractice action. In four issues, the Bankses contend generally: (1) the evidence is factually insufficient to
support the jury finding that the hospital was not negligent; (2) the trial court erred in including certain
instructions in the jury charge; and (3) the trial court erred in allowing certain testimony. We overrule the
Bankses' issues and affirm the trial court's judgment.
07-1000 ERIC GANT v. GRAND PRAIRIE FORD, L.P.; from Tarrant County; 2nd district
(02-06-00386-CV, ___ SW3d ___, 07-19-07, pet. denied Feb 2008)
07-1023 JEAN PIERRE v. CAROL TILLEY, DESIGN WEST, INC., D.R. HORTON, INC. DBA D.R. HORTON
CUSTOM HOMES AND D.R. HORTON - TEXAS, LTD.; from Tarrant County; 2nd district
(02-06-00308-CV, ___ SW3d ___, 07-19-07, pet denied Feb 2008)
07-1029 BRUCE R. LIVELY v. J. RANDLE HENDERSON, INDIVIDUALLY AND AS A PARTNER IN HENDERSON
& HAMMON, LLP; from Harris County; 14th district (14-05-01229-CV, ___ SW3d ___, 11-13-07, pet denied
Feb 2008)(breach of contract, fiduciary duty, standing, release)
07-1043 IN THE MATTER OF A.M.B., A JUVENILE; from Bexar County; 4th district (04-07-00005-CV, ___
SW3d ___, 11-07-07, pet denied Feb 2008)
Petitions for Review Denied February 1, 2008
None
|