Friday, September 16, 2005

The Texas Supreme Court did not hand down any opinions this morning, but it did grant three petitions for review. If time permits, we may offer a bit of discussion as to the cases the Court has decided to review. For now, however, I’ll just post links to the underlying opinions, so that curious readers can stay up to speed. We’re still figuring out the scope of this blog, so we’re not sure if discussion of the granting of Petitions for Review would be useful to readers or practical for us to undertake. Comments are, as always, welcome.

The first opinion the Court has decided to review is a bailment case out of Houston involving an agreement to store and sell bull semen.

The second case the Court will hear is also from Houston, involving two close corporations organized to run a day spa. The opinion in that case is lengthy, and it contains discussions of numerous legal issues that may arise when a small business fails to turn out the way its principals envisioned.

Finally, the Court granted a petition for review in a negligence case from El Paso. In that case, the El Paso Court of Appeals affirmed a trial court’s judgment that a company could be liable when one of its employees, under the influence of methamphetamine, shot an El Paso police officer. According to the Court of Appeals opinion, the testimony at trial indicated that methamphetamine use was common among the members of Defendant’s maintenance crew staying in El Paso while repairing railroad tracks, who used the drug to “stay alert and awake” while working twelve hour shifts, six to seven hours a week.

Oral arguments in these three cases will be in late November.

Technorati Tags:
litigation, Texas Supreme Court, law