Second Court of Appeals | Case Summaries

Summaries of Civil Opinions and Published Criminal Opinions Issued – Week of October 2, 2006

NOTE: Summaries are prepared by the court's staff attorneys and law clerks for public information only and reflect his or her interpretation alone of the facts and legal issues. The summaries are not part of the court's opinion in the case and should not be cited to, quoted, or relied upon as the opinion of the court.

Links to full text of opinions (PDF version) can be accessed by clicking the cause number.

Bell v. VPSI, Inc., No. 02-04-00352-CV (Oct. 5, 2006) (Gardner, J., joined by Dauphinot and McCoy, JJ.).: Held: Operators of van-pool program were entitled to summary judgment on injured van passenger's vicarious liability claims. As a matter of law, the van's driver was an independent contractor. Even if the driver was an employee, he was not in the course and scope of employment; though he first drove the van to a service station for an oil change, he then used the van for personal errands for several hours before the accident.
Kilpatrick v. Kilpatrick, No. 02-05-00237-CV (Oct. 5, 2006) (McCoy, J., joined by Livingston and Walker, JJ.).: Held: Seller of stock, who had previously declared bankruptcy without disclosing his stock ownership to the bankruptcy court, did not have standing to sue buyers; the stock remained with the bankruptcy estate because it was an undisclosed asset in the previous bankruptcy, regardless of whether the nondisclosure was intentional or unintentional. Even though the bankruptcy trustee subsequently authorized seller to pursue the suit, summary judgment against seller was nevertheless appropriate because seller was required to have standing at the time the suit was filed, and his defect in standing could not be retroactively cured.