2008 Opinions by Justice Nathan Hecht Coastal Oil & Gas Corp. v. Garza Energy Trust, No. 05-0466 (Tex. Aug. 29, 2008)(Hecht) (oil and gas, trespass, rule of capture) Justice Willett delivered a concurring opinion. Justice Johnson delivered an opinion concurring in part and dissenting in part, in which Chief Justice Jefferson joined, and in Part I of which Justice Medina joined. Zurich American Ins. Co. v. Nokia Inc., No. 06-1030 (Tex. Aug. 29,2008)(Jefferson) (insurance coverage, duty to defend) Justice Hecht delivered a dissenting opinion, in which Justice Brister joined. Federal Ins. Co. v. Samsung Electronics America, No. 06-1040 (Tex. Aug. 29, 2008)(Jefferson) (duty to defend cell phone company against consumer class action found) Justice Hecht delivered a dissenting opinion, in which Justice Brister joined. Trinity Universal Ins. Co. v. Cellular One Group, No. 07-0140 (Tex. Aug. 29, 2008)(Jefferson) (insurance law, duty to defend, companion case to Zurich v. Nokia) Justice Hecht delivered a dissenting opinion, in which Justice Brister joined. Evanston Ins. Co. v. Atofina Petrochemicals, No. 03-0647 (Tex. June 13, 2008)(Substituted opinion by Justice Paul Green on further motions for rehearing) (insurance case) Justice Hecht delivered an opinion concurring in part and dissenting in part Koa Holdings, LP v. Young, No. 07-0197 (Tex. 2008) (Hecht) (restricted appeal, default judgment) (partnership law, defendant not sued and not properly served in individual capacity, default judgment not proper) First American Title Ins. Co. v. Susan Combs, Comptroller, No. 05-0541 (Tex. May 16, 2008)(Majority Opinion by Justice Don Willett) (taxation of out-of-state insurers, retaliatory tax) Justice Hecht delivered a dissenting opinion, in which Justice Wainwright, Justice Brister, and Justice Medina joined. Unauthorized Practice of Law Committee v. American Home Assurance Co., Inc., No. 04-0138 (Tex. Mar. 28, 2008)(Hecht) (regulaation of the practice of law, in-house counsel) Justice Johnson delivered a dissenting opinion, in which Justice Green joined. Toward a class (action) less court system: Justice Hecht leads move from mere de-certfication in consumer class action appeals to outright dismissal on jurisdictional grounds - four justices, including the Chief Justice, don't go along Daimler Chrysler Corp. v. Inman, No. 03-1189 (Tex. Feb. 1, 2008)(Opinion by Justice Nathan Hecht)(class action dismissed on standing grounds, Tex. R. Civ. P. 42, jurisdictional dismissal, DWOJ) DAIMLERCHRYSLER CORPORATION v. BILL INMAN, DAVID CASTRO, AND JOHN WILKINS, EACH INDIVIDUALLY AND ON BEHALF OF ALL OTHERS SIMILARLY SITUATED; from Nueces County; 13th district (13-02-00415-CV, 121 S.W.3d 862, 11/20/03) The Court reverses the court of appeals' judgment and dismisses the case for want of jurisdiction. Justice Hecht delivered the opinion of the Court, in which Justice Wainwright, Justice Brister, Justice Medina, and Justice Willett joined. Chief Justice Wallace Jefferson delivered a dissenting opinion, in which Justice Harriet O'Neill, Justice Paul Green, and Justice Phil Johnson joined. Justice Hecht Dissents in insurance case previously decided in 2002 Justice Hecht deliveres dissenting opinion in Excess Underwriters v. Frank's Casing Crew & Rental Tools, Inc., No. 02-0730 (Tex. Feb. 1, 2008)(Substitute opinion on rehearing by Justice Harriet O'Neill, 2005 opinion withdrawn) (insurance law, right to reimbursement) By refusing to apply to insurers the same law of unjust enrichment that applies to everyone else, the Court hands Frank’s Casing Crew & Rental Tools, Inc. $7 million for which it paid nothing and to which it has no contractual right. The court does not deny the injustice of this result but argues that such windfalls are necessary to avoid situations in which an insured might be prejudiced by having to pay its own liabilities. Never mind that Frank’s Casing claims no such prejudice in this case, or that no case can be found in which any insured ever claimed such prejudice, or that if any imagined prejudice ever actually did occur, it could easily be remedied. The Court’s holding is contrary to the only other cases it can find on the subject, and it has been expressly rejected in the Restatement (Third) of Restitution and Unjust Enrichment. 2007 Opinions Written by Justice Nathan Hecht Justice Hecht's jurisprudential priorities revealed in lengthy opinion carving out regulatory exemption for bible colleges HEB Ministries, Inc. v Teas Higher Education Coordinating Board, No. 03-0995 (Tex. Aug. 31, 2007)(Hecht) (regulation of religious institutions of higher education unconstitutional under first amendment) HEB MINISTRIES, INC., SOUTHERN BIBLE INSTITUTE, AND HISPANIC BIBLE INSTITUTE v. TEXAS HIGHER EDUCATION COORDINATING BOARD AND COMMISSIONER RAYMUND PAREDES; from Travis County; 3rd district (03‑01‑00103‑CV, 114 SW3d 617, 07‑24‑03) The Court reverses the court of appeals' judgment and remands the case to the trial court. Justice Hecht announced the judgment of the Court and delivered the opinion for the Court with respect to Part I, in which Chief Justice Jefferson, Justice O’Neill, Justice Wainwright, Justice Brister, Justice Medina, Justice Green, and Justice Johnson joined, and with respect to Part III-B, in which Chief Justice Jefferson, Justice O'Neill, Justice Brister, Justice Medina, and Justice Green, joined, and an opinion with respect to Parts II, III-A, and III-C, in which Justice O’Neill, Justice Brister, and Justice Medina joined. Energy Service Co. of Bowie, Inc. v. Superior Snubbing Services, Inc., No. 05-0202 (Tex. Aug. 24, 2007) (Hecht)(worker's comp, indemnity) 05‑0202 ENERGY SERVICE COMPANY OF BOWIE, INC. v. SUPERIOR SNUBBING SERVICES, INC.; from Wise County; 2nd district (02-04-00131-CV, 158 S.W.3d 112, 02-03-05) The Court reverses the court of appeals' judgment and remands the case to the trial court. Justice Hecht delivered the opinion of the Court, in which Chief Justice Jefferson, Justice Brister, Justice Medina, and Justice Lang joined. Justice Johnson delivered a dissenting opinion, in which Justice Wainwright, Justice Green, and Justice Willett joined. (Justice Douglas S. Lang sitting by appointment pursuant to section 22.005 of the Texas Government Code) (Justice O'Neill not sitting) Baylor University Prevails in Faculty Employment Dispute Baylor Univ. v. Coley, No. 04-0916 (Tex. Apr. 20, 2007)(Hecht)(employment dispute, no breach of contract, jury instruction, tenure) Justice Johnson delivered a concurring opinion in Baylor Univ. v. Coley re claim of error in jury instructions. County of Dallas v. Wiland, No. 04-0247 (Tex. Feb. 16, 2007)(Opinion by Justice Hecht) Separeate opinion by Justice Scott Brister County of Dallas v. Walton, No. 04-0631 (Tex. Feb. 16, 2007)(Justice Nathan Hecht) Separate opinion by Brister Dissents and Concurrences - Separate 2007 Opinions by Justice Hecht Stephen F. Austin State Univ. v. Flynn, No. 04-0515 (Tex. Jun. 29, 2007)(Medina)(Recreational Use Statute, TTCA, plea to the jurisdiction, sovereign immunity; suit dismissed as jurisdictionally barred) Stephen F. Austin State University v. Diane Flynn; from Nacogdoches County; 12th district (12 03 00240 CV, 202 S.W.3d 167, 04/30/2004) The Court reverses the court of appeals' judgment and renders judgment dismissing the case. Justice Medina authored the opinion of the Court, in which Chief Justice Jefferson, Justice O'Neill, Justice Brister, Justice Green, and Justice Johnson joined, and in all but Part III of which Justice Hecht, Justice Wainwright, and Justice Willett joined. Justice Hecht wrote a concurring opinion in Stephen F. Austin State University v. Flynn in which Justice Wainwright and Justice Willett joined. In Re Allied Chemical Corp. No. 04-1023 Tex. Jun. 15, 2007)(Jun. 15, 2006)(Brister)(mandamus) (procedural law) IN RE ALLIED CHEMICAL CORPORATION, ET AL.; from Hidalgo County; 13th district (13-04-00491-CV, ___ S.W.3d ___, 11-04-04) stay order issued March 28, 2005, lifted motion to lift stay, dismissed as moot second supplemental motion to lift stay, dismissed as moot motion to dismiss mandamus proceeding as moot, denied The Court conditionally grants the petition for writ of mandamus. Justice Brister delivered the opinion of the Court, joined by Justice Hecht, Justice Medina, Justice Green, and Justice Willett Justice Hecht delivered a concurring opinion Chief Justice Jefferson delivered a dissenting opinion, joined by Justice O'Neill, Justice Wainwright, and Justice Johnson Justice Wainwright delivered a dissenting opinion 2006 Opinions by Justice Nathan L. Hecht Meyer v. WMCO-GP, No. 04-0252, No. 04-0252 (Tex. Dec. 22, 2006)(Justice Hecht) [arbitration law, motion to compel arbitration, nonsignatory] Justice O'Neill delivered a dissenting opinion In Meyer v. WMCO-GP Justice Hecht delivered a dissenting opinion in Hallco v. McMullen County Hallco Texas, Inc. v. McMullen County, No. 02-1176 (Tex. Dec. 29, 2006)(Justice Harriet O’Neill) [zoning power, landfill, water quality, environmental protection, takings claim rejected] Brookshire Grocery Co. v. Taylor, No. 03-0408 (Tex. Dec. 1, 2006)(Hecht) (premises liability, store, slip and fall case) Justice Johnson delivered a concurring opinion om Brookshire Grocery Co.v. Taylor Justice O'Neill delivered a dissenting opinion, joined by Justice Medina Hoover Slovacek v. Walton, No. 04-1004 (Tex. Nov. 3,2006)(Jefferson)(attorneys fees, contingent fees) Justice Hecht delivered a dissenting opinion in Slovacek v. Walton The Coca-Cola Co v. Harmar Bottling Co., No. 03-0737 (Tex. Oct. 20, 2006)(Justice Hecht) [monopolies, anti-competitive business practices, marketing] Justice Brister delivered a dissenting opinion in Coca-Cola Co. v. Harmar Bottling Co. Tooke v. City of Mexia, No. 03-0878 (Tex. Jun. 30, 2006)(Justice Hecht) [sovereign immunity law, sue and be sued language, waiver of immunity, breach of contract claims] Separate opinion by Johnson Dissenting opinion by O'Neill GM v. Hudiburg Chevrolet, No. 03-0987 (Tex. Mar. 24, 2006)(Justice Hecht) [product liability law] AT&T v. SWBT, No. 03-0789 (Tex. Jan 27, 2006)(Justice Hecht) Can Nonsignatory Enforce Arbitration? Meyer v. WMCO-GP, No. 04-0252, No. 04-0252 (Tex. Dec. 22, 2006)(Justice Hecht) A person who has agreed to arbitrate disputes with one party may in some cases be required to arbitrate related disputes with others. This is such a case. A motor vehicle manufacturer exercised its right of first refusal to acquire its dealer’s business and transferred the right to its assignee, preempting the dealer’s agreement to sell the business to another. The jilted buyer sued the manufacturer and its assignee for interfering with the proposed contract of sale. Although the defendants had no contract with the jilted buyer, they demanded arbitration based on the buyer’s agreement to arbitrate disputes with the dealer. The trial court refused to compel arbitration, and a divided court of appeals affirmed. We reverse. . . . The trial court should have granted Meyer’s and Ford’s motions to compel arbitration. Accordingly, we reverse the judgment of the court of appeals and remand the case to the trial court for further proceedings consistent with this opinion. Justice O'Neill delivered a dissenting opinion In Meyer v. WMCO-GP May Texas Court Grant Remedy Against Alleged Anti-Competitive Business Conduct? The Coca-Cola Co v. Harmar Bottling Co., No. 03-0737 (Tex. Oct. 20, 2006)(Justice Hecht) We address two issues. One is whether Texas courts can adjudicate and remedy an anti-competitive injury occurring in another state, either under the TFEAA or the law of that state. We hold that the TFEAA will not support extraterritorial relief in the absence of a showing that such relief promotes competition in Texas or benefits Texas consumers. We also hold that Texas courts, as a matter of interstate comity, will not decide how another state’s antitrust laws and policies apply to injuries confined to that state. The other issue is whether the plaintiffs have shown substantial harm, real or threatened, to competition in the relevant market as a result of the defendants’ conduct. We conclude that there is no evidence of such harm and that the lack of evidence is fatal to all of the plaintiffs’ claims. Accordingly, we reverse the judgment of the court of appeals, dismiss the plaintiffs’ claims of injury occurring in other states, and render judgment that the plaintiffs take nothing on their claims of injury occurring in Texas. . . . Accordingly, the court of appeals’ judgment is reversed. The RCC franchisees’ claims of injury occurring in other states are dismissed. On their claims of injury occurring in Texas, judgment is rendered that the RCC franchisees take nothing. houston-opinions.com |
| Texas Supreme Court Opinions by Justice Nathan L. Hecht |
| Also see ---> Photo and Profile of Texas Supreme Court Justice Nathan Hecht Opinions by Fellow Justices: Chief Justice Wallace B. Jefferson | Justice Nathan L. Hecht Justice Harriet O'Neill | Justice Dale Wainwright | Justice Scott A. Brister | Justice David Medina Justice Paul W. Green | Justice Phil Johnson | Justice Don R. Willett | All Recent Tex. Opinions |
LINKS TO PAGES WITH INFORMATION ON TEXAS SUPREME COURT CASES AND OPINIONS Texas Supreme Court Blog 2006 Supreme Court Opinions 2007 Supreme Court Opinions 2008 Tex. Sup Ct. Opinions Jefferson Court Blog Texas Arbitration Case Law Also see Court of Appeals Pages Austin Texas Cases Houston Texas Cases Houston Opinions Home Page First Court of Appeals Cases (2008) Fourteenth Court of Appeals (2008) |