From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Eiland v. Turpin

Supreme Court of Texas
Apr 26, 2001
46 S.W.3d 872 (Tex. 2001)

Summary

following Murphy

Summary of this case from Vacek Group v. Clark

Opinion

No. 00-0485

Opinion Delivered: April 26, 2001

On Petition for Review from the Court of Appeals for the Eighth District of Texas

A. Craig Eiland, Truett Bryan Akin, Jamison Associates, Houston, for Petitioner.

James Mosley, Terry W. Rhoads, Cotton Bledsoe, Tighe Dawson, Midland, for Respondents.


The issue in this legal-malpractice case is whether the rule we announced in Hughes v. Mahaney Higgins, 821 S.W.2d 154 (Tex. 1991), tolled the statute of limitations on the plaintiff's claims. The court of appeals, with one justice dissenting, held that it did not, and affirmed a summary judgment for the defendant on limitations grounds. 16 S.W.3d 461.

In light of our recent decisions in Apex Towing Co. v. Tolin, 41 S.W.3d 118 (Tex. 2001), and Underkofler v. Vanasek, ___ S.W.3d ___ (Tex. 2001), without hearing oral argument, we grant the petition for review without reference to the merits, vacate the court of appeals' judgment, and remand this case to that court for reconsideration and for other proceedings. See Tex.R.App.P. 59.1, 60.2(f).

Justice BAKER did not participate in this decision.


Summaries of

Eiland v. Turpin

Supreme Court of Texas
Apr 26, 2001
46 S.W.3d 872 (Tex. 2001)

following Murphy

Summary of this case from Vacek Group v. Clark
Case details for

Eiland v. Turpin

Case Details

Full title:Paige Eiland, Petitioner v. Turpin, Smith, Dyer, Saxe McDonald, and Dick…

Court:Supreme Court of Texas

Date published: Apr 26, 2001

Citations

46 S.W.3d 872 (Tex. 2001)

Citing Cases

Vacek Group v. Clark

The Eighth and Fourteenth Courts of Appeals have discussed the stare decisis effect of the judicial dictum in…