TEXAS SUPREME COURT CASES

• Hyundai Motor Co. v. Vasquez, 189 S.W.3d 743 (Tex. 2006)(court held that the trial court did not abuse its discretion by not permitting lawyer to ask jurors at voir dire what weight they would give a particular piece of evidence -- in this case, that a victim was not wearing a seat belt at the time of the accident)
• Olveda v. Sepulveda, 189 S.W.3d 740 (Tex. 2006)(O'Neill, J., dissenting from denial of petition for review) (challenging a dismissal of a medical malpractice claim based on alleged failure of expert report to comply with requirements of article 4590i)
• Sterling Trust Co. v. Adderley, 168 S.W.3d 835 (Tex. 2005) (the Texas Securities Act’s requirement of “reckless disregard for the truth or the law” means that an alleged aider is subject to liability only if it rendered assistance to the seller in the face of a perceived risk that its assistance would facilitate untruthful or illegal activity by the primary violator; therefore, trial court erred in failing to instruct jury that aider must possess a “general awareness” that his role was part of an overall activity that is improper)
• General Motors Corp. v. Iracheta, 161 S.W.3d 462 (Tex. 2005) (reversing $12.2 million judgment and rendering a take nothing judgment where plaintiff’s expert witnesses not qualified to offer opinion that fuel line siphoned in rear and did not constitute evidence of design defect; also holding objection to plaintiff’s personal address to the jury in Spanish during closing arguments was timely)
• Diamond Offshore Management Co. v. Guidry, 171 S.W.3d 840 (Tex. 2005) (reversing judgment of more than $600,000 and remanding case for a new trial based on failure to submit query to jury on decedent’s and co-worker’s course of employment -- essential elements of the plaintiff’s Jones Act claim)
• Garza v. Garcia, 137 S.W.3d 36 (Tex. 2004) (trial court’s general order granting motion for change of venue presumed to have transferred based on convenience; therefore, order not appealable)
• King v. Graham, 126 S.W.3d 75 (Tex. 2003) (refining causation element of malicious prosecution; evidence did not support verdict and judgment of recovery for malicious prosecution)
• Golden Eagle Archery, Inc. v. Jackson, 116 S.W.2d 757 (Tex. 2003) (reversing court of appeals’ decision that found an inadequate award of damages for physical impairment for other than loss of vision and setting forth new standard for factual sufficiency review complaints related to damages elements that have the potential to overlap)
• Monsanto Co. v. Boustany, 73 S.W.3d 225 (Tex. 2002) (holding, under Delaware law, that subsidiary employees’ “termination of employment,” so as to trigger expiration of stock options, occurred upon sale of subsidiary)
• Bally Total Fitness Corp. v. Jackson, 53 S.W.3d 352 (Tex. 2001) (denying interlocutory appeal jurisdiction over trial court’s granting summary judgment on liability prior to notice being given to class)
• In re Canales, 52 S.W.3d 698 (Tex. 2001) (orig. proceeding) (party waived objection to trial assignment of visiting judge by not objecting to same judge earlier in pre-trial hearing)
  
• In re Southwestern Bell Telephone Co., 35 S.W.3d 602 (Tex. 2000) (orig. proceeding) (per curiam) (holding that order to set aside venue transfer more than one year after original venue decision made was void; that bankruptcy of co-defendant voided original transfer order only as to that defendant; and that mandamus relief appropriate for void orders, regardless of whether adequate appellate remedy exists)
• Spradlin v. Jim Walter Homes, Inc., 34 S.W.3d 578 (Tex. 2000) (plain language of recent revisions to Tex. Const. homestead provisions does not extend additional procedural protections to liens for the construction of new improvements)
• Louisiana-Pacific Corp. v. Andrade, 19 S.W.3d 245 (Tex. 1999) (reversed $2.5 million exemplary damage award; court found no evidence of defendant’s awareness of extreme risk of harm from failing to lock-out electricity to overhead crane rails during asbestos removal by independent contractor)
• Bradley’s Electric, Inc. v. CIGNA Lloyds Ins. Co., 995 S.W.2d 675 (Tex. 1999) (an appellate court must decide a reversal rendition point before reaching a remand point)
• H.E. Butt Grocery Co. v. Resendez, 988 S.W.2d 218 (Tex. 1999) (no evidence that grocery store’s manner of produce display was unreasonably dangerous; reversing $150,000 judgment and rendering take-nothing judgment)
• H.E. Butt Grocery Co. v. Bilotto, 985 S.W.2d 22 (Tex. 1998) (affirming jury instruction conditioning answering damages question on a finding of less than 50% negligence by plaintiff)
• In re Barber, 982 S.W.2d 364 (Tex. 1998) (orig. proceeding) (mandamus granted requiring trial court to recognize validity of stamp-signed order vacating a default judgment)
• Hyundai Motor Co. v. Alvarado, 974 S.W.2d 1 (Tex. 1998) (federal law does not preempt state tort law imposing liability for seat belt design)
• Pat Baker Co., Inc. v. Wilson, 971 S.W.2d 447 (Tex. 1998) (reversible error in take-nothing judgment affecting plaintiffs’ claim against one defendant does not require reversal as to co-defendant not affected by error)
• Montalvo v. Fourth Court of Appeals, 917 S.W.2d 1 (Tex. 1995) (orig. proceeding) (court of appeals erred in ordering Judge Montalvo to vacate scheduling order in Norplant litigation, because complaining party failed to demonstrate harm essential to mandamus relief)
• Matthiessen v. Schaefer, 915 S.W.2d 479 (Tex. 1995) (reversal of underlying judgment requires reversal of turnover order based thereon).
• Hyundai Motor Co. v. Alvarado, 892 S.W.2d 853 (Tex. 1995) (non-suit ineffective as to claims previously disposed of in partial summary judgment)
• Browning-Ferris, Inc. v. Reyna,  865 S.W.2d 925 (Tex. 1993) (evidence was legally insufficient to support tortious interference finding -- reversing $797,000 judgment and rendering judgment that Reyna take nothing)
• GTE Communications Systems Corp. v. Tanner, 856 S.W.2d 725 (Tex. 1993) (trial court’s sanction of striking the defendant’s pleadings held to be an abuse of discretion)
• Alexander Oil Co. v. City of Seguin, 825 S.W.2d 434 (Tex. 1991) (unless annexation is wholly void, exclusive method for attacking validity of municipal annexation is through quo warranto proceeding)
• Sears, Roebuck & Co. v. Ramirez, 824 S.W.2d 558 (Tex. 1992) (orig. proceeding) (trial court abused discretion by ordering production of federal tax returns, given Sears’ prior production of annual reports reflecting net worth)
• Christiansen v. Prezelski, 782 S.W.2d 842 (Tex. 1990) (appellant who files partial statement of facts must comply with Appellate Rule 53(d); otherwise, it is presumed that omitted portions are relevant to disposition of appeal)
• Sealock v. Texas Federal Savings & Loan Association, 755 S.W.2d 69 (Tex. 1988) (reverse triangular merger activates golden parachute contractual provision)
• Steves Sash & Door Co., Inc. v. Ceco Corp., 751 S.W.2d 473 (Tex. 1988) (“principal” under usury statutes, refers to amount upon which interest is charged or earned; prejudgment interest is not recoverable in usury case for penalty damages)
• Employers Casualty Co. v. Block, 744 S.W.2d 940 (Tex. 1988) (agreed judgment between plaintiff and putative insured does not preclude insurer from contesting coverage in subsequent suit; insurer’s general denial was sufficient to contest coverage)
• Garcia v. Peeples, 734 S.W.2d 343 (Tex. 1987) (trial court abused discretion by issuing protective order prohibiting plaintiffs from sharing discovery with non-parties)
• MMP, Ltd. v. Jones, 710 S.W.2d 59 (Tex. 1986) (issue of fact concerning purported promise to pay disputed debt precluded summary judgment)
• Acord v. General Motors Corp., 669 S.W.2d 111 (Tex. 1984) (in closely contested case, instructing jury that manufacturer is not insurer of its products constitutes comment on weight of evidence)
• Fleishman v. Guadiano, 651 S.W.2d 730 (Tex. 1983) (trial court correctly refused to instruct jury to disregard plaintiff’s negligence in design defect question)
• Arthur Bros., Inc. v. U.M.C., Inc., 647 S.W.2d 244 (Tex. 1982) (under article 2212a, defendant’s cross-claim for contribution must be resolved in plaintiff’s suit against contribution plaintiff)
• Burk Royalty Co. v. Walls, 616 S.W.2d 911 (Tex. 1981) (establishing definition to be used for submission of gross negligence claim)
• Alamo National Bank v. Kraus, 616 S.W.2d 908 (Tex. 1981) (enumerating factors to be considered to evaluate reasonableness of exemplary damage award)
• Speier v. Webster College, 616 S.W.2d 617 (Tex. 1981) (demonstrative chart summarizing trial testimony is admissible into evidence)
• Ball v. Dillard, 602 S.W.2d 521 (Tex. 1980) (surface lessee’s denial of access to mineral lessee violated mineral lessee’s lease rights and constituted unreasonable interference)
• Lubbock Manufacturing Co. v. Sames, 598 S.W.2d 234 (Tex. 1980) (accident’s occurrence in county of suit was sufficient to maintain venue in that county against non-resident manufacturer)
• Westchester Fire Insurance Co. v. Alvarez, 576 S.W.2d 771 (Tex. 1978) (failure to specify grounds for summary judgment in motion is defect of form that is waived unless excepted to prior to rendition of judgment)
• Hurtado v. Texas Employers’ Insurance Association, 574 S.W.2d 536 (Tex. 1978) (party opposing admission of voluminous records is not required to segregate inadmissible items from admissible ones; objection to representative sample of inadmissible items is sufficient)