Big Morning at the Texas Supreme Court

The Texas Supreme Court issued seven opinions this morning. We’re still sorting through them, and we will comment in some detail on the ones that are applicable to this blog, but I wanted to at least note them quickly in case any is of immediate interest to any of our readers. I would also note that, after a cursory review, none seems to have anything to do with the law as it pertains to arbitration, although a few certainly do merit further comment here.

In the Interest of A.M. and B.M.: discusses Texas Child Support Law.

Evanston Ins. Co. v. Atofina Petrochemicals: insurance coverage dispute concerning an excess policy, a third-party additional insured, and a separate indemnity agreement between the additional insured and the policy holder.

Kroger v. Subero: intentional infliction of emotional distress and malicious prosecution claims against Kroger stemming from an alleged shoplifting incident.

Belt and Murphy, Joint Independent Executrixes of the Estate of David Terk, Deceased, v. Oppenheminer, Blend, Harrision & Tate: can the personal representatives of an estate bring a legal malpractice claim against a law firm that provided estate planning services for the deceased?

Shupe, et al v. Lingafelter, et al: personal injury case involving a multi-vehicle accident, a trucking company, and a negligent entrustment claim.

American Flood Research v. Jones: discovery sanctions case.

In re Ron Smith: involves supersedeas bonds and post-judgment discovery.

Technorati Tags:
litigation, Texas Supreme Court, law