Summaries of Civil Opinions and Published Criminal Opinions Issued – Week of October 04, 2010

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.

Clark v. Cotten Schmidt, L.L.P. f/k/a Kirkley Schmidt & Cotten, L.L.P.,    No. 02-09-00400-CV    (Oct. 7, 2010)    (Livingston, C.J., joined by McCoy, J., and Dixon W. Holman, J. (Senior Justice, Retired, Sitting by Assignment)).

Held:    The trial court erred by granting Appellee's motion for summary judgment on the basis of its quasi-estoppel affirmative defense because the record contains material and disputed facts regarding the defense. However, the trial court did not err by denying Appellant's motion for summary judgment on his breach of contract claim because Appellant has not shown that his interpretation of the contract (a law firm's partnership agreement) is conclusively correct. The case must therefore be reversed and remanded for further proceedings on the breach of contract claim.

« Return to Case Summaries Home Page «