13 Cited authorities

Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc.
477 U.S. 242 (1986) Cited 236,991 times 38 Legal Analyses
Holding that summary judgment is not appropriate if "the dispute about a material fact is ‘genuine,’ that is, if the evidence is such that a reasonable jury could return a verdict for the nonmoving party"
Diamond Shamrock Refining Co., L.P.
168 S.W.3d 164 (Tex. 2005) Cited 107 times 1 Legal Analyses
Holding that clear and convincing evidence of gross negligence did not exist
Wright v. Ford Motor Co.
508 F.3d 263 (5th Cir. 2007) Cited 66 times
In Wright, this Court analyzed whether the presumption was applicable and then explained that a "fact question as whether the presumption has been rebutted will be submitted to the jury."
Ackermann v. Wyeth Pharmaceuticals
471 F. Supp. 2d 739 (E.D. Tex. 2006) Cited 20 times
Holding that, on summary judgment, the plaintiff needed to both show evidence that an express warranty existed and that the plaintiff relied on it
KPH Consolidation, Inc. v. Romero
102 S.W.3d 135 (Tex. App. 2003) Cited 18 times
No. 14-00-01177-CV. January 9, 2003. Rehearing Overruled April 24, 2003. Appeal from the 295th District Court, Harris County, Texas, Trial Court Cause No. 98-48856, Tracy Kee Christopher, J. Reversed and Remanded and Majority and Concurring Opinions filed. Michael A. Hatchell, Tyler, Richard A. Sheehy, Russell H. McMains, Houston, for appellant. Richard P. Hogan Jr., Richard Warren Mithoff, Houston, for appellees. Panel consists of Chief Justice BRISTER and Justices FOWLER and SEYMORE. OPINION WANDA
Strauss v. Ford Motor Co.
439 F. Supp. 2d 680 (N.D. Tex. 2006) Cited 14 times
Dismissing an implied warranty claim where the plaintiff failed to allege that his vehicle was unfit for transportation, a vehicle's "sole ordinary purpose"
Martin v. Home Depot U.S.A., Inc.
369 F. Supp. 2d 887 (W.D. Tex. 2005) Cited 15 times
Granting summary judgment in favor of defendant because plaintiff did not provide "pre-suit notice as required by Texas law"
Scott v. Dorel Juvenile Group, Inc.
773 F. Supp. 2d 664 (N.D. Tex. 2011)
Civil Action No. 3:09-CV-0799-K. March 7, 2011. John Dale Sloan, Jr., Laureen Furey Bagley, Sloan Bagley Hatcher Perry Law Firm, Longview, TX, Kirk L. Pittard, Durham Pittard LLP, Dallas, TX, Pat-rick Karl Short, Law Firm of Patrick Short, Rockwall, TX, for Plaintiffs. Anthony A. Avey, Jeremy Robert Sloan, Prichard Hawkins McFarland Young LLP, San Antonio, TX, Daniel C. Steppick, Shipman Steppick PC, Denton, TX, Jona-than Judge, Matthew G. Schiltz, Schiff Hardin LLP, Chicago, IL, Paul D. Schoon-over
Woolard v. Mobil Pipe Line Company
479 F.2d 557 (5th Cir. 1973) Cited 11 times
No. 72-2726. June 7, 1973. Rehearing and Rehearing En Banc Denied July 16, 1973. B. Jeff Crane, Jr., Houston, Tex., William H. Tabb, Ronald L. Neill, Dallas, Tex., for defendants-appellants. W. W. Watkins, Houston, Tex., William E. Townsley, Beaumont, Tex., John M. O'Quinn, Houston, Tex., for plaintiffs-appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas. Before TUTTLE, THORNBERRY and DYER, Circuit Judges. THORNBERRY, Circuit Judge: On the night of June 20, 1969
Rule 56 - Summary Judgment
Fed. R. Civ. P. 56 Cited 329,861 times 158 Legal Analyses
Holding a party may move for summary judgment on any part of any claim or defense in the lawsuit
Section 41.001 - Definitions
Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code § 41.001 Cited 609 times 6 Legal Analyses
Defining the standard for gross negligence
Section 41.003 - Standards for Recovery of Exemplary Damages
Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code § 41.003 Cited 583 times 4 Legal Analyses
Permitting recovery of exemplary damages if the claimant proves that fraud, malice, or gross negligence caused the harm at issue
Section 2.607 - Effect of Acceptance; Notice of Breach; Burden of Establishing Breach After Acceptance; Notice of Claim or Litigation to Person Answerable Over
Tex. Bus. & Com. Code § 2.607 Cited 99 times
Providing that, where tender has been accepted, "the buyer must within a reasonable time after he discovers or should have discovered any breach notify the seller of breach or be barred from any remedy"

McCune et al v. Graco Children's Products et al

13 Cited authorities

Holding that summary judgment is not appropriate if "the dispute about a material fact is ‘genuine,’ that is, if the evidence is such that a reasonable jury could return a verdict for the nonmoving party"

Holding that clear and convincing evidence of gross negligence did not exist

In Wright, this Court analyzed whether the presumption was applicable and then explained that a "fact question as whether the presumption has been rebutted will be submitted to the jury."

Holding that, on summary judgment, the plaintiff needed to both show evidence that an express warranty existed and that the plaintiff relied on it

Dismissing an implied warranty claim where the plaintiff failed to allege that his vehicle was unfit for transportation, a vehicle's "sole ordinary purpose"

Granting summary judgment in favor of defendant because plaintiff did not provide "pre-suit notice as required by Texas law"

Holding a party may move for summary judgment on any part of any claim or defense in the lawsuit

Defining the standard for gross negligence

Permitting recovery of exemplary damages if the claimant proves that fraud, malice, or gross negligence caused the harm at issue

Providing that, where tender has been accepted, "the buyer must within a reasonable time after he discovers or should have discovered any breach notify the seller of breach or be barred from any remedy"