Legal Opinion · Dissent

McKinney v. National Union Fire Insurance Co. of Pittsburgh

Court of Appeals of Texas

Decided March 10, 1988No. 2-86-089-CVPublished

1DissentParris, Justice

I dissent from the majority ruling on the appellant’s second point of error. I dissent because it was error to allow a witness, not identified in a response to discovery asking the identity of persons with knowledge of relevant facts, to testify; and the appellant’s objection to the testimony was sufficient to preserve error.

Appellant’s fourteenth interrogatory requests that appellee state:

State the full name and last known address, giving the street, street number, city and state of every person known to you or your attorneys who have knowledge of any relevant facts pertaining to this cause…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Yeldell v. Holiday Hills Retirement and Nursing Center, Inc.Texas Supreme Court · 1985
  2. Walsh v. Mullane, Texas Court of Appeals, 1st District (Houston)1986
  3. Brewer v. Isom, Texas Court of Appeals, 5th District (Dallas)1986
  4. De Los Angeles Garay v. Texas Employers' Insurance Ass'n, Texas Court of Appeals, 13th District1985

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

Powered by the Exa API