Tex. 2010 Per Curiam Texas Supreme Court Opinions

2010 TEXAS SUPREME COURT CASES
DECIDED WITH PER CURIAM OPINIONS

TEXAS APPELLATE CASE LAW LINKS (Texas
Supreme Court Decisions and Appeals court
cases in which Petition for Review was
denied)

law-ADR-family-law
law-ADR
law-DJA-declaratory-judgment
law-DSA
law-DWOJ-dismissal-for-want-of-jurisdiction
law-DWOP-dismissal
law-HCLC
law-IIED-intentional-infliction-of-emotional-distress
law-ILA
law-JNOV
law-PI-auto-accidents-negligence
law-Rule-11-TRCP-11
law-TTCA
law-WBA
law-abstract-questions-of-law
law-account stated
law-adverse-possession
law-advisory opinion
law-age-discrimination
law-animals
law-annexation
law-arbitration
law-asbesto s litigation
law-attorney-client-disputes
law-attorneys-fees
law-breach-of-contract
law-breach-of-fiduciary-duty
law-breach-of-warranty
law-capacity
law-certified questions
law-child-support
law-choice-of-law
law-citation
law-civil-commitment
law-civil-conspiracy
law-class-actions
law-condemnation
law-construction
law-consumer-law
law-contempt
law-contract
law-credit-card-debt-suit
law-declaratory-judgment
law-deed
law-deed-restrictions-restrictive-covenants
law-deemed-admissions
law-defamation-credit
law-defamation-libel-slander
law-default-judgment
law-discovery-disputes
law-discovery-presuit
law-discovery-rule
law-divorce-property-division
law-domestication-enforcement-of-foreign-judgment
law-drivers-license-suspension-DUI-DWI
law-duress-undue-influence
law-easement
law-election-law
law-employment-at-will
law-employment
law-estoppel
law-execution-enforcement-of-judgment
law-exhaustion-of-administrative-remedies
law-expunction
law-family-law-international
law-family-law
law-federal-preemption
law-fire-insurance-liability
law-food-restaurant-hospitality
law-foreclosure
law-forfeiture
law-foreign law
law-forum-selection
law-fracturing-of-claims
law-fraudulent-concealment-tolling
law-fraudulent inducement
law-governmental-entities-local
law-governmental-entities-state-agencies
law-governmental-immunity
law-gross-negligence
law-hearsay-objection
law-home-equity-loans
law-home-owner
law-homestead
law-indemnity-indemnify-indemnification
law-individual-capacity
law-ineffective-assistance-of-counsel
law-informed-consent
law-insurance-business-regulation
law-insurance-coverage-disputes
law-insurance-duty-to-defend-indemnify
law-insurance-life
law-intervention
law-judicial-admission
law-judicial-notice
law-judicial-notice-of-foreign-law
l aw-jury-error
law-jury-selection
law-juveniles
law-leases
law-lien
law-limitations
law-malpractice-legal
law-malpractice-medical
law-money-had-and-received
law-mootness-doctrine
law-motion-for-continuance
law-motion-for-new-trial
law-motion for rehearing
law-motion-to-reinstate
law-motion-to-show-authority
law-negligence
law-negligent-entrustment
law-nonsuit
law-nuisance
law-official-capacity
law-official-immunity-defense
law-oil-and-gas-and-minerals
law-parental-rights
law-parole-evidence-rule
law-partition-of-land
law-partnership disputes
law-permanent-injunction
law-plenary-power
law-post-divorce-actions
law-preemption-federal
law-premises-liability
law-prisoner-death
law-prisoner-suits
law-pro-se-suits
law-probate
law-product-liability
law-promissory-note
law-property-taxes
law-public-employment
law-ratification
law-recusal
law-reinstatement
law-religion
law-res-judicata-doctrine
law-residential-construction
law-restricted-appeal
law-retaliation
law-retroactive-application
law-ripeness-doctrine
law-sales-tax
law-sanctions
law-sovereign-immunity
law-special-appearance
law-special exception
law-specific-performance
law-standing-doctrine
law-statutory-construction
law-takings-claim-inverse-condemnation
law-temporary-orders-TRO
law-termination-of-parental-rights
law-test-for-abuse-of-discretion
law-tortious-interference
law-trade-secret
law-trade-secrets
law-turnover-order
law-unauthorized-practice-of-law-UPLC
law-unfair-competition
law-unliquidated-damages
law-venue
law-vex-lit
law-voluntary-underemployment
law-waiver
law-water
law-workers-comp
law-workplace-injury
plenary-power

2010 Texas Supreme Court Per Curiam Opinions
See ---> 2010 Tex. Sup. Ct. Opinions (signed and unsigned)

Also see ---> 2011 Texas Supreme Court Per Curiam Opinions

2009 Texas Supreme Court Per Curiam Opinions

2008 Supreme Court of Texas

Per Curiam

Opinions

2007 Supreme Court of Texas Decisions

2010 PER CURIAM OPINIONS IN REVERSE CHRONOLOGICAL ORDER

Windmountain Ranch, LLC v. City of Temple, Tx, No. 09-0026 (Tex. Dec. 3, 2010)(per curiam)
(statute of limitations on real estate lien foreclosure, recording requirement for extension agreement not
applicable to bankruptcy court order)
WIND MOUNTAIN RANCH, LLC v. CITY OF TEMPLE, TEXAS; from Bell County; 7th district (07-07-00305-
CV, ___ SW3d ___, 11-25-08)
Pursuant to Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 59.1, after granting the petition for review and without
hearing oral argument, the Court reverses the court of appeals' judgment and renders judgment.
Per Curiam Opinion [pdf]
Electronic Briefs N/A

UT at Austin v. Hayes, No. 09-0300 (Tex. Dec. 3, 2010)(per curiam) (sovereign immunity)(TTCA state
university held immunity in PI suit by bicyclist who ran into chain/street obstruction dismissed)
THE UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS AT AUSTIN v. ROBERT HAYES; from Travis County; 3rd district (03-06-
00581-CV, 279 SW3d 877, 03-06-09)
as amended
Pursuant to Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 59.1, after granting the petition for review and without
hearing oral argument, the Court reverses the court of appeals' judgment and dismisses the case for
lack of jurisdiction.
Per Curiam Opinion [pdf]
View Electronic Briefs

Christi Bay Temple v. GuideOne Speciality Mutual Ins. Co., No. 09-0683 (Tex. Dec. 3, 2010)(per curiam)
(church and capacity to sue)
CHRISTI BAY TEMPLE v. GUIDEONE SPECIALTY MUTUAL INSURANCE CO., ET AL.; from Nueces
County; 13th district (13-07-00537-CV, ___ SW3d ___, 03-31-09)
Pursuant to Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 59.1, after granting the petition for review and without
hearing oral argument, the Court reverses the court of appeals' judgment and remands the case to the
trial court.
Per Curiam Opinion [pdf]
View Electronic Briefs

Reyes v. City of Laredo, No. 09-1007 (Tex. Dec. 3, 2010)(per curiam) (TTCA, city held immune, no
actual knowledge of road flooding despite 911 calls, drowning death)
MARIA ALEJANDRO REYES, INDIVIDUALLY AND AS REPRESENTATIVE OF THE ESTATE OF KAREN
REYES, A/K/A KAREN VAQUERA, DECEASED v. THE CITY OF LAREDO; from Webb County; 4th district
(04-09-00132-CV, ___ SW3d ___, 09-09-09)
2 petitions
Pursuant to Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 59.1, after granting the petition for review and without
hearing oral argument, the Court reverses the court of appeals' judgment and dismisses the case.
Per Curiam Opinion [pdf]
View Electronic Briefs

In Re Scheller, No. 09-1072 (Tex. Nov. 5, 2010)(per curiam) (grandparent access suit, mandamus)
IN RE RICHARD SCHELLER; from Travis County; 3rd district (03-09-00678-CV, ___ SW3d ___, 12-23-
09)
stay order issued January 4, 2010, lifted
Pursuant to Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 52.8(c), without hearing oral argument, the Court
conditionally grants the writ of mandamus.
Per Curiam Opinion [pdf]
View Electronic Briefs in 09-1072 IN RE RICHARD SCHELLER

Sweed v. Nye, No. 09-0465 (Tex. Oct. 22, 2010)(per curiam)(defective notice of appeal held sufficient to
invoke appellate jurisdiction; curable by amendment after deadline)
JAMES LEE SWEED v. JAY L. NYE ET AL.; from El Paso County; 8th district (08-07-00132-CV, ___
SW3d ___, 04-09-09)
Pursuant to Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 59.1, after granting the petition for review and without
hearing oral argument, the Court reverses the court of appeals' judgment and remands the case to that
court.
Per Curiam Opinion [pdf]
View Electronic Briefs in 09-0465 SWEED v. NYE

In re 24R, Inc dba The Boot Jack, No. 09-1025 (Tex. Oct. 22, 2010)(per curiam)
(arbitration compelled in employment context)(mandamus granted)
IN RE 24R, INC., D/B/A THE BOOT JACK; from Hidalgo County; 13th district (13-09-00359-CV, ___
SW3d ___, 09-22-09)
Pursuant to Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 52.8(c), without hearing oral argument, the Court
conditionally grants the writ of mandamus.
Per Curiam Opinion [pdf]
View Electronic Briefs in 09-1025 IN RE 24R, INC., D/B/A THE BOOT JACK

Vaughn v. Drennon, No. 10-0226 (Tex. Oct. 22, 2010)(per curiam)
(presumption of finality of judgment after conventional trial for purposes of appeal)
MILLARD VAUGHN AND BARBARA VAUGHN v. PAUL DRENNON AND MARY DRENNON; from Sabine
County; 12th district (12-09-00064-CV, ___ SW3d ___, 12-31-09)
Pursuant to Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 59.1, after granting the petition for review and without
hearing oral argument, the Court reverses the court of appeals' judgment and remands the case to that
court.
Per Curiam Opinion [pdf]
View Electronic Briefs in 10-0226 VAUGHN v. DRENNON

Colquitt v. Brazoria Cty., No. 09-0369 (Tex. Oct. 1, 2010)(per curiam)
(TTCA, timely filing lawsuit as notice of claim, actual notice of claim)
GLENN COLQUITT v. BRAZORIA COUNTY; from Brazoria County; 14th district (14-08-00210-CV, 282
SW3d 582, 01-27-09)
Pursuant to Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 59.1, after granting the petition for review and without
hearing oral argument, the Court reverses the court of appeals' judgment and remands the case to the
trial court.
Per Curiam Opinion [pdf]
View Electronic Briefs in 09-0369 COLQUITT v. BRAZORIA COUNTY

Mid-Continental Casualty Co. v. Glober Enercom Mgmt, Inc., No. 09-0744 (Tex. Oct. 1, 2010)(per curiam)
(insurance coverage, exclusions, contract formation, contract construction)
MID-CONTINENT CASUALTY COMPANY v. GLOBAL ENERCOM MANAGEMENT, INC.; from Harris
County; 14th district (14-07-01006-CV, 293 SW3d 322, 07-21-09)
Pursuant to Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 59.1, after granting the petition for review and without
hearing oral argument, the Court affirms in part and reverses in part the court of appeals' judgment and
renders judgment.
Per Curiam Opinion [pdf]
View Electronic Briefs in 09-0744 MID-CONTINENT CASUALTY CO. v. GLOBAL ENERCOM
MANAGEMENT, INC.

City of Elsa, TX v. Gonzalez, No. 09-0834 (Tex. Oct. 1, 2010)(per curiam)(whistleblower act, good-faith
report of violation of law to appropriate law-enforcement agency, sufficiency of pleaded jurisdictional
allegations).
CITY OF ELSA, TEXAS v. JOEL HOMER GONZALEZ; from Hidalgo County; 13th district (13-07-00555-
CV, 292 SW3d 221, 07-09-09)
Pursuant to Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 59.1, after granting the petition for review and without
hearing oral argument, the Court reverses the court of appeals' judgment and dismisses the case.
Per Curiam Opinion [pdf]
View Electronic Briefs 09-0834 CITY OF ELSA, TEXAS v. GONZALEZ

In re B.T., No. 10-0383 (Tex. Oct. 1, 2010)(per curiam)(juvenile case; trial court abused discretion in
proceeding without complete diagnostic study)
IN RE B.T., A JUVENILE; from Smith County; 12th district (12-10-00141-CV, ___ SW3d ___, 05-21-10)
stay order issued May 27, 2010, lifted
Pursuant to Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 52.8(c), without hearing oral argument, the Court
conditionally grants the writ of mandamus.
Per Curiam Opinion [pdf]
View Electronic Briefs in No. 10-0383 IN RE B.T., A JUVENILE

[...]

June 18, 2010

In the Matter of BW. (pdf) No. 08-1044 (Tex. June 18, 2010)(child prostitution and delinquency
prosecution under juvenile code)
IN THE MATTER OF B.W.; from Harris County; 1st district (01-07-00274-CV, 274 SW3d 179, 10-02-08)
The Court reverses the court of appeals' judgment and remands the case to the trial court.
Justice O'Neill delivered the opinion of the Court, in which Chief Justice Jefferson, Justice Hecht, Justice
Medina, Justice Green, and Justice Guzman joined. [pdf]
Justice Wainwright delivered a dissenting opinion, in which Justice Johnson and Justice Willett joined.
[pdf]
View Electronic Briefs in 08-1044 IN THE MATTER OF B.W.

Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. Merrell (pdf), No. 09-0224 (Tex. Jun. 18, 2010)(product liability; wrongful death
claim based on fire attributed to defective lamp)(sumpreme court again finds fault with expert testimony
on causation)
WAL-MART STORES, INC. v. CHARLES T. MERRELL, SR., AS WRONGFUL DEATH BENEFICIARY OF
CHARLES THOMAS MERRELL, II, DECEASED, AND AS REPRESENTATIVE OF THE ESTATE OF
CHARLES THOMAS MERRELL, II AND JANE CEVERNY, AS WRONGFUL DEATH BENEFICIARY OF
CHARLES THOMAS MERRELL II, DECEASED; from Fannin County; 6th district (06-07-00122-CV, 276
SW3d 117, 12-16-08)
Pursuant to Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 59.1, after granting the petition for review and without
hearing oral argument, the Court reverses the court of appeals' judgment and renders judgment.
Per Curiam Opinion [pdf]
(Justice Green not sitting)
View Electronic Briefs in WAL-MART STORES, INC. v. MERRELL

Opinion Released June 11, 2010

UH v. Barth, No. 08-1001 (Tex. June 11, 2010)(per curiam)(jury award in professor's whistleblower suit
against state university thrown out)
[I]n State v. Lueck, 290 S.W.3d 876, 883 (Tex. 2009), we held that “the elements of section 554.002(a) can be considered
to determine both jurisdiction and liability.” Accordingly, whether Barth’s reports to University officials are good-faith
reports of a violation of law to an appropriate law-enforcement authority is a jurisdictional question. Jurisdiction may be
raised for the first time on appeal and may not be waived by the parties.   Tex. Ass’n of Bus. v. Tex. Air Control Bd., 852 S.
W.2d 440, 445 (Tex. 1993). The University challenges whether the trial court had jurisdiction. Therefore, without hearing
oral argument, Tex. R. App. P. 59.1, we reverse and remand to the court of appeals to determine whether, under the
analysis set forth in Lueck, Barth’s claims meet the Whistleblower Act’s jurisdictional requirements for suit against a
governmental entity and, thus, whether the trial court had jurisdiction over Barth’s suit.
THE UNIVERSITY OF HOUSTON v. STEPHEN BARTH; from Harris County; 1st district (01‑06‑00490‑CV,
265 SW3d 607, 07‑03‑08)
Pursuant to Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 59.1, after granting the petition for review and without
hearing oral argument, the Court reverses the court of appeals' judgment and remands the case to that
court.
Per Curiam Opinion [pdf]
View Electronic Briefs 08-1001 THE UNIVERSITY OF HOUSTON v. BARTH

Zenith Ins. Co. v. Ayala, No. 09-0292 (Tex. June 11, 2010)(per curiam)(workers comp)
In this workers’ compensation case, the court of appeals concluded that the carrier waived its right to dispute the extent of
the claimant’s compensable injury by failing to adhere to Texas Labor Code section 409.021(c)’s sixty-day deadline. __ S.
W.3d __. We recently held that the sixty-day period for challenging compensability does not apply to a dispute over extent
of injury. State Office of Risk Mgmt. v. Lawton, 295 S.W.3d 646, 649-50 (Tex. 2009). In light of Lawton, we reverse the court
of appeals’ judgment and remand this case to the trial court for further proceedings.
Because this dispute involves extent of injury, rather than compensability, section 409.021(c)’s sixty-day deadline is
inapplicable. Without hearing oral argument, we reverse the court of appeals’ judgment and remand the case to the trial
court for further proceedings. Tex. R. App. P. 59.1, 60.2(d).
ZENITH INSURANCE COMPANY v. CARMEN AYALA; from Dallas County; 5th district (05‑08‑00276‑CV,
___ SW3d ___, 02‑26‑09) as supplemented
Pursuant to Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 59.1, after granting the petition for review and without
hearing oral argument, the Court reverses the court of appeals' judgment and remands the case to the
trial court.
Per Curiam Opinion [pdf]
View Electronic Briefs 09-0292 ZENITH INS. CO. v. AYALA

May 2010

Regenia v. Hidalgo, No. 09-0415 (Tex. 2010)(per curiam)
(right to raise argument that could not be raised under prior law)
LEILA REGENIA BROWN HIDALGO v. ALVIN STEVE HIDALGO;
from Dallas County; 5th district (05-06-00966-CV, 279 SW3d 456, 02-25-09)
Should a party who relies on a then-valid procedural argument in the court of appeals be able to assert substantive
arguments if this Court invalidates the procedural argument while the case is pending? We answer yes. ...
When Leila briefed her case to the court of appeals, she made a legally meritorious procedural argument that Order 3
was void as untimely. Further, the court of appeals at that time had no reason to reach the substantive merits of a
jurisdictionally void order. Due to the timing of events, Leila is confronted with a trial court judgment that she believes is
substantively defective, but she has not had the opportunity to have those arguments heard on appeal. In light of a change
in the law and in the interest of justice, Leila should be allowed to argue to the court of appeals the substantive reasons
she believes the trial court’s judgment was erroneous.
Pursuant to Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 59.1, after granting the petition for review and without
hearing oral argument, the Court reverses the court of appeals' judgment and remands the case to that
court.
Per Curiam Opinion [pdf]
View Electronic Briefs in No. 09-0415 HIDALGO v. HIDALGO

Texas Health Insurance Risk Pool v. Sigmundik, No. 09-0772 (Tex. 2010) (per curiam)
(reduction ordered in recovery of wrongful death plaintiffs in favor of contractual subrogation rights of
insurer who paid medical bill incurred before injured worker died; amount to be determined on remand)
TEXAS HEALTH INSURANCE RISK POOL v. SHARON B. SIGMUNDIK, BENJAMIN J. SIGMUNDIK AND
ZACHARY P. SIGMUNDIK, AS THE SOLE AND LEGAL HEIRS AND BENEFICIARIES OF THOMAS M.
SIGMUNDIK, DECEASED, AND/OR OF THE ESTATE OF THOMAS M. SIGMUNDIK, DECEASED; OTTO
L. MONECKE AND VIRGINIA L. MONECKE;
from Fayette County; 3rd district (03-05-00057-CV, ___ SW3d ___, 07-31-09)
As we noted in Fortis Benefits, “contract rights generally arise from contract language; they do not derive their validity from
principles of equity but directly from the parties’ agreement.” 234 S.W.3d at 647. Here, the trial court acknowledged the
subrogation provision, quoted it in full, and then denied any distribution of funds based upon the provision. While the trial
court was free to exercise some discretion in dividing the settlement funds, it abused its discretion by awarding the Risk
Pool nothing. The “made whole” doctrine has no application in this case. Accordingly, in light of our Fortis Benefits
decision and without hearing oral argument in this case, we grant the petition for review, reverse the court of appeals’
judgment, and remand to the trial court to determine what portion of the settlement funds should be allocated to the
estate. See Tex. R. App. P. 59.1.
Pursuant to Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 59.1, after granting the petition for review and without hearing oral
argument, the Court reverses the court of appeals' judgment and remands the case to the trial court.
Per Curiam Opinion [pdf]
View Electronic Briefs in No. 09-0772 TEX. HEALTH INS. RISK POOL v. SIGMUNDIK

Zimmerman, MD v. Gonzalez Anaya, No. 08-0580 (Tex. May 7, 2010) (Tex. May 7, 2010)(per curiam)
(right to interlocutory appeal of medical resident of state-supported medical school; government
employee status)
GEOFFREY ZIMMERMAN, M.D. v. WENDY GONZALEZ ANAYA, INDIVIDUALLY AND A/N/F OF
CHRISTOPHER GABRIEL HERNANDEZ, DECEASED; from Harris County;
1st district (01‑07‑00570‑CV, ___ SW3d ___, 06‑05‑08)
Pursuant to Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 59.1, after granting the petition for review and without
hearing oral argument, the Court reverses the court of appeals' judgment and remands the case to that
court.
Per Curiam Opinion [pdf]
See Electronic Briefs in GEOFFREY ZIMMERMAN, M.D. v. ANAYA

In Re Ensco Offshore Int'l Co., No. 09-0317 (Tex. May 7, 2010)(Tex. May 7, 2010)(per curiam)
(forum non conveniens mandamus granted)
IN RE ENSCO OFFSHORE INTERNATIONAL COMPANY, ENSCO INTERNATIONAL INCORPORATED
AND ENSCO OFFSHORE COMPANY, INDIVIDUALLY AND AS SUCCESSOR-IN-INTEREST OF CHILES
OFFSHORE, INC.; from Dallas County;
5th district (05‑08‑01092‑CV, ___ SW3d ___, 08‑19‑08)
Pursuant to Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 52.8(c), without hearing oral argument, the Court
conditionally grants the writ of mandamus.
Per Curiam Opinion [pdf]
See Electronic Briefs in IN RE ENSCO OFFSHORE INTERNATIONAL CO.

City of Dallas v. Carbajal, No. 09-0427 (Tex. May 7, 2010)(per curiam)
(TTCA Tort Claims Act, presuit notice requirement, police report held insufficient to constitute actual
notice)
CITY OF DALLAS v. OLIVIA J. CARBAJAL; from Dallas County;
5th district (05-08-00500-CV, 278 SW3d 802, 01-22-09)
Pursuant to Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 59.1, after granting the petition for review and without
hearing oral argument, the Court reverses the court of appeals' judgment and renders judgment.
Per Curiam Opinion [pdf]
See Electronic Briefs in CITY OF DALLAS v. CARBAJAL

In Re Odyssey Healthcare, Inc., No. 09-0786 (Tex. May 7, 2010) (per curiam opinion)
(arbitration mandamus granted in employment injury case against nonsubscriber employer, challenges to
enforceability based on public policy, unconscionability and Tenth Amendment fail)
IN RE ODYSSEY HEALTHCARE, INC. AND GEORGE PORTILLO; from El Paso County;
8th district (08-09-00174-CV, ___ SW3d ___, 08-12-09) stay order issued October 9, 2009, lifted
Pursuant to Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 52.8(c), without hearing oral argument, the Court
conditionally grants the writ of mandamus.
Per Curiam Opinion [pdf]
See Electronic Briefs in IN RE ODYSSEY HEALTHCARE, INC.

Zinc Nacional, S.A. v. Bouche Trucking, Inc ., No. 09-0734 (Tex. April 9, 2010)(per curiam)
(negligence case, non-resident defendant did not have minimum contacts with Texas for purposes of
establishing specific jurisdiction by using a third-party trucking service to transport its goods through
Texas to an out-of-state customer)
ZINC NACIONAL, S.A. v. BOUCHÉ TRUCKING, INC.; from El Paso County; 8th district (08-07-00314-CV,
296 SW3d 763, 07-31-09)
Pursuant to Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 59.1, after granting the petition for review and without
hearing oral argument, the Court reverses the court of appeals' judgment and remands the case to that
court.
Per Curiam Opinion [pdf]
See Electronic Briefs in ZINC NACIONAL, S.A. v. BOUCHÉ TRUCKING, INC.

In Re Lisa Laser USA, Inc., No. 09-0557 (Tex. Apr. 16, 2010)(per curiam)
(forum selection clause enforced by mandamus)
IN RE LISA LASER USA, INC. AND LISA LASER PRODUCTS, OHG.; from Travis County;
3rd district (03-09-00240-CV, ___ SW3d ___, 05-15-09)
Pursuant to Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 52.8(c), without hearing oral argument, the Court
conditionally grants the writ of mandamus.
Per Curiam Opinion [pdf]
(Justice Hecht not sitting)
eBriefs N/A

CONTRACTUAL FORUM SELECTION GIVEN EFFECT
In re Laibe Corp., No. 09-0426 (Tex. Mar. 26, 2010)(per curiam)
(contractual forum selection enforced by mandamus, laches waiver argument rejected)
IN RE LAIBE CORPORATION; from Wise County;
2nd district (02-09-00089-CV, ___ SW3d ___, 04-24-09)
Pursuant to Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 52.8(c), without hearing oral argument, the Court
conditionally grants the writ of mandamus.
Per Curiam Opinion [pdf]
View Electronic Briefs in No. 09-0426 IN RE LAIBE CORPORATION

STATE AGENCY HELD IMMUNE TO ULTRA VIRES CLAIM
TxDoI v. Reconveyance Services, Inc. (pdf), No. 07-0786 (Tex. Mar. 12, 2010)(per curiam)
(s overeign and governmental immunity, plaintiff should have brought ultra vires claim against agency
official, agency itself helt to enjoy s overeign immunity, government entity entitled to grant of plea to the
jurisdi c tion)
TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF INSURANCE v. RECONVEYANCE SERVICES, INC.; from Travis County; 3rd
district (03-06-00313-CV, 240 SW3d 418, 08-31-07)
Pursuant to Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 59.1, after granting the petition for review and without
hearing oral argument, the Court reverses the court of appeals' judgment and renders judgment.
Per Curiam Opinion [pdf]
View Electronic Briefs in 07-0786 TEX. DEPT. OF INS. v. RECONVEYANCE SERVICES, INC.

In Re Columbia Med. Center of Las Colinas, Inc., No. 09-0733 (Tex. Mar. 12, 2010)(per curiam)
(exemplary damages reduced by mandamus after post-appeal final judgment)
IN RE COLUMBIA MEDICAL CENTER OF LAS COLINAS, INC. D/B/A LAS COLINAS MEDICAL CENTER;
from Dallas County
Pursuant to Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 52.8(c), without hearing oral argument, the Court
conditionally grants the writ of mandamus.
Per Curiam Opinion [pdf]
View Electronic Briefs in 09-0733 IN RE COLUMBIA MED. CTR. OF LAS COLINAS, INC.

Galveston ISD v. Jaco, No. 09-0195 (Tex. Feb. 12, 2010)(per curiam)
(WBA case remanded to the court of appeals to determine whether plaintiff has alleged a violation under
the Texas Whistleblower Act under the court's new precedent in Lueck, which jurisdictionalized the
sufficiency of the facts pleaded in support of each element of the claim)
GALVESTON INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT v. BRENT JACO; from Galveston County;
14th district (14-08-00271-CV, 278 SW3d 477, 01-20-09)
Pursuant to Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 59.1, after granting the petition for review and without
hearing oral argument, the Court reverses the court of appeals' judgment and remands the case to that
court. Per Curiam Opinion
(Justice Guzman not sitting) [she wrote the opinion in the court below]

In the Matter of RD, No. 09-0343 (Tex. Feb. 12, 2010)(per curiam)(juvenile proceedings, civil rules
applied to motion for new trial, error preservation for appellate review)
The Texas Supreme Court concludes that [the juvenile's] general challenge to the sufficiency of the
evidence to support the jury's delinquency finding met Rule 324's requirement for preserving his
challenge to the jury's rejection of his affirmative defense.
IN THE MATTER OF R.D., A JUVENILE; from Bexar County; 8th district (08-07-00100-CV, ___ SW3d
___, 03-12-09)
Pursuant to Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 59.1, after granting the petition for review and without
hearing oral argument, the Court reverses the court of appeals' judgment and remands the case to that
court.
Per Curiam Opinion

ORDERS ON PETITIONS FOR REVIEW: THE FOLLOWING PETITION FOR REVIEW IS ABATED:
Gallagher Headquarters Ranch Development, Ltd., No. 08-0773 (Tex. Feb. 12, 2010)(per curiam)
(petition abated, findings of fact requested from trial court, scope of release pursuant to settlement at
issue)
GALLAGHER HEADQUARTERS RANCH DEVELOPMENT, LTD., CHRIS HILL AND JULIE HOOPER v.
CITY OF SAN ANTONIO AND CITY PUBLIC SERVICE; from Bexar County; 4th district (04-07-00325-CV,
269 SW3d 628, 07-23-08) abatement order issued
The petition is abated and remanded to the trial court for findings of fact. The trial court shall submit its
findings to this Court no later than May 3, 2010. The parties may, within thirty days after the trial court's
findings are submitted, provide a supplementary brief to this Court.
Per Curiam Opinion
(Justice Hecht not sitting)

In re JHG, No. 09-0531 (Tex. Jan. 22, 2010) (termination of parental rights appeal, statement of points)
IN RE J.H.G.; from Collin County; 5th district (05-08-00875-CV, 290 SW3d 400, 05-14-09)
Pursuant to Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 59.1, after granting the petition for review and without
hearing oral argument, the Court reverses the court of appeals' judgment and remands the case to that
court.
Per Curiam Opinion
View Electronic Briefs

Carroll v. Carroll, No. 08-0644 (Tex. Jan. 22, 2010)(per curiam)(proceedings concerning trust, trustee
removal suit for accounting belong in district court, not county court)
JOHNNY CARROLL, INDIVIDUALLY AND AS TRUSTEE OF THE JOHNNY CARROLL TRUST v. LETHA
FRANCES CARROLL AND DONALD CARROLL; from Hill County; 10th district (10-07-00006-CV, ___
SW3d ___, 05-14-08)
Pursuant to Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 59.1, after granting the petition for review and without
hearing oral argument, the Court reverses the court of appeals' judgment, vacates the county court's
judgment, and remands the case to the county court.
Per Curiam Opinion

In re United Scaffolding, Inc., No. 09-0403 (Tex. Jan. 22, 2010)(per curiam)
(grant of new trial after jury verdict requires explanation pursuant to recently established new precedent)
IN RE UNITED SCAFFOLDING, INC.; from Jefferson County; 9th district (09-09-00098-CV, 287 SW3d
274, 04-16-09)
Pursuant to Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 52.8(c), without hearing oral argument, the Court
conditionally grants the petition for writ of mandamus.
Per Curiam Opinion