Summaries of Civil Opinions and Published Criminal Opinions Issued – Week of January 10, 2011

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.

Med. Ctr. of Lewisville v. Slayton,   No. 02-10-00101-CV    (Jan. 13, 2011)   (Walker, J., joined by Dauphinot and Gabriel, JJ.).

Held:   In accordance with the prohibition on claim splitting set forth by the Texas Supreme Court in Yamada v. Friend, No. 08-0262, 2010 WL 5135334, at *1 (Tex. Dec. 17, 2010), we hold that after the expiration of Texas Civil Practice and Remedies Code section 74.351's 120-day expert report deadline, Slayton (a health care liability claimant) could not avoid dismissal of her suit against Appellant (a health care provider) by filing an amended petition pleading a common law premises liability slip-and-fall cause of action against the same health care provider and based on the same facts as alleged in her original petition.

Laboriel-Guity v. State,   No. 02-10-00175-CR   (Jan. 13, 2011)   (Meier, J., joined by Gardner, J.; Dauphinot, J., concurs with opinion).  [Note: Both opinions are at the same link in one document.]

Held:    Appellant failed to preserve for appellate review his argument challenging the severity of his sentence.

Concurrence:   Appellant did not have to preserve his argument on appeal by filing a motion for new trial below and had no opportunity to object after trial. But when the trial court properly announced the sentence to be imposed and asked Appellant if there was any lawful reason why that sentence should not be imposed, Appellant stated that there was not and accepted his sentence.

« Return to Case Summaries Home Page «