Legal Opinion
Pruett v. City of Amarillo
Court of Appeals of Texas
Decided July 21, 1997No. . 07-96-0319-CVPublishedCited by 8 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
QUINN, Justice.
Mary Francis Pruett and Patrick Daniel Pruett (the Pruetts) appeal from a final summary judgment denying them recovery against the City of Amarillo (Amarillo or the City). Through one point of error, they contend that the trial court erred in granting Amarillo’s motion for summary judgment because 1) they had alleged an exception to sovereign immunity, 2) an affirmative defense was not established as a matter of law, and 3) the elements of negligence were not conclusively negated. We affirm in part and reverse in part.
Background
The Pruetts sued Amarillo for negligence. The…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Randall's Food Markets, Inc. v. JohnsonTexas Supreme Court · 1995
- Cincinnati Life Insurance Co. v. CatesTexas Supreme Court · 1996
- City of Lancaster v. ChambersTexas Supreme Court · 1994
- Litton Industrial Products, Inc. v. GammageTexas Supreme Court · 1984
- Miller v. Galveston/Houston Diocese, Texas Court of Appeals, 7th District (Amarillo)1995
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by8 opinions
- Reaves v. City of Corpus ChristiCourt of Appeals of Texas · 2017
- City of Pasadena v. Belle, Texas Court of Appeals, 14th District (Houston)2009
- Archer v. Medical Protective Co., Texas Court of Appeals, 7th District (Amarillo)2006
- City of Pasadena, Texas ("City") v. Steven Belle and James West, Texas Court of Appeals, 14th District (Houston)2009
- Grace Emily Archer, M.D. v. the Medical Protective Co. of Ft. Wayne, IN and Medical Protective Ins. Serv., Inc., Indiv. and D/B/A the Medical Protective Co. of Ft. Wayne, IN, Charles E. Moss, Peterson, Farris, Moss, Pruitt & Parker, P.C. F/K/A Peterson, Farris, Doores & Jones, P.C., Texas Court of Appeals, 7th District (Amarillo)2006
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.