Second Court of Appeals | Case Summaries

Summaries of Civil Opinions and Published Criminal Opinions Issued – Week of July 25, 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.

Gaughan v. Nat'l Cutting Horse Ass'n, No. 02-09-00450-CV (July 28, 2011) (Gardner, J., joined by McCoy, J. and William Brigham, J. (Senior Justice, Retired, Sitting by Assignment)).: Held: The trial court did not err by entering a protective order, by declaring that Appellee's records are entitled to confidential treatment under Texas law, or by granting summary judgment on Appellee's request for attorney's fees.

Allegiance Hillview, L.P. v. Range Tex. Prod., LLC, No. 02-10-00062-CV (July 28, 2011) (Gardner, J., joined by Meier and Gabriel, JJ.).: Held: Legally and factually sufficient evidence supports the trial court's findings that Appellees provided timely and sufficient notice of an event of force majeure, that an event of force majeure beyond Appellees' reasonable control occurred, and that Appellees timely submitted their applications for city permits.

In re K.G., No. 02-10-00257-CV (July 28, 2011) (McCoy, J., joined by Walker and Meier, JJ.).: Held: Family code section 161.004 is not the exclusive means for involuntary termination of parental rights when the trial court has denied a prior petition to terminate unless the subsequent termination is based on evidence presented at the prior trial. Because evidence of constructive abandonment occurred after the trial court denied the prior petition, the trial court did not err by basing its termination of Mother's parental rights to K.G. on family code section 161.001(1)(N) instead of family code section 161.004.

Pacheco v. State, No. 02-10-00355-CR (July 28, 2011) (Meier, J., joined by Livingston, C.J., and Dixon W. Holman, J. (Senior Justice, Retired, Sitting by Assignment)).: Held: The trial court did not err by denying Pacheco's motion to suppress evidence because the police employed reasonable means and reasonable procedures in drawing Pacheco's blood.