Legal Opinion

Missouri Pacific Railroad v. Limmer

Texas Court of Appeals, 14th District (Houston)

Decided November 29, 2005No. 14-02-00688-CVPublishedCited by 9 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION ON REHEARING

EVA M. GUZMAN, Justice.

Upon consideration of the motion for rehearing filed by appellees Patricia Lim-mer, Billye Joyce Smith, and Bobbye Jean Nothnagel (collectively referred to herein as the “Limmers”) and the responses thereto, we conclude that the trial court did not err in ruling against appellant Missouri Pacific Railroad Company d/b/a Union Pacific Railroad Company (“Union Pacific”) as to its preemption defense. Accordingly, we grant the Limmers’ motion for rehearing to this extent, deny the remainder of the Limmers’ motion for rehearing, withdraw the opinions…

2Cases cited53 opinions

  1. City of Keller v. WilsonTexas Supreme Court · 2005
  2. Cain v. BainTexas Supreme Court · 1986
  3. Dow Chemical Co. v. FrancisTexas Supreme Court · 2001
  4. Pool v. Ford Motor Co.Texas Supreme Court · 1986
  5. Maritime Overseas Corp. v. EllisTexas Supreme Court · 1998

48 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by9 opinions

  1. Smith v. Burlington Northern & Santa Fe Railway Co.Montana Supreme Court · 2008
  2. Missouri Pacific Railroad v. LimmerTexas Supreme Court · 2009
  3. Melodie McFarland and Pamela Lykes v. Stacie Boisseau, Texas Court of Appeals, 1st District (Houston)2011
  4. Hargrove v. Missouri Pacific R. Co.Louisiana Court of Appeal · 2006
  5. Schrock v. Sisco, Texas Court of Appeals, 11th District (Eastland)2007

4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API