Legal Opinion
Ventura v. Banales
Texas Court of Appeals, 13th District
Decided September 7, 1995No. 13-95-224-CVPublishedCited by 14 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
SEERDEN, Chief Justice.
In this mandamus proceeding, relators, Jean Ventura and other representative members of a class of plaintiffs, contend that the trial court abused its discretion in failing to dismiss their lawsuit against Valero Refining Company, the real party in interest. We conditionally grant a writ of mandamus.
In June 1994, the relators filed a class action lawsuit against Valero for injuries to a class of surrounding residents who were allegedly exposed to toxic fumes released by Valero. Valero answered the lawsuit and discovery proceeded, but the trial court never heard…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- Cooter & Gell v. Hartmarx Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1990
- American Pipe & Construction Co. v. UtahSupreme Court of the United States · 1974
- Crown, Cork & Seal Co. v. ParkerSupreme Court of the United States · 1983
- Hooks v. Fourth Court of AppealsTexas Supreme Court · 1991
- American Cyanamid Company v. Robert A. McGheeCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1963
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by14 opinions
- J.R. Clearwater Inc., Jeff Young Russell King, Intervenor-Plaintiffs, and Frank Falgiani and Marius Griffo v. Ashland Chemical Co.Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1996
- St. Louis Southwestern Railway Co. v. Voluntary Purchasing Groups, Inc., Texas Court of Appeals, 6th District (Texarkana)1996
- Vincent v. Money StoreDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 2013
- Grizzle Ex Rel. Grizzle v. Texas Commerce Bank, N.A., Texas Court of Appeals, 5th District (Dallas)2001
- Zimmerman v. Ottis, Texas Court of Appeals, 13th District1996
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.