Legal Opinion

Tate v. Commodore County Mutual Insurance Co.

Texas Court of Appeals, 5th District (Dallas)

Decided March 1, 1989No. 05-88-00643-CVPublishedCited by 58 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

WHITHAM, Justice.

The trial court imposed abuse of discovery sanctions upon the appellant-plaintiffs, Ira Tate and Lucille Tate, in the form of striking the Tates’ pleadings and thereafter entering an order of dismissal with prejudice in favor of the appellee-defen-dant, Commodore County Mutual Insurance Company. The dispute centers on the trial court’s order requiring the Tates to produce their sole interrogatory-designated expert witness for deposition. The Tates insist that the nonparty witness was not an agent or employee subject to their control. Under the facts of the present case, we…

2Cases cited11 opinions

  1. Downer v. Aquamarine Operators, Inc.Texas Supreme Court · 1985
  2. Insurance Corp. of Ireland v. Compagnie Des Bauxites De GuineeSupreme Court of the United States · 1982
  3. Hammond Packing Co. v. ArkansasSupreme Court of the United States · 1909
  4. Great American Insurance Company v. MurrayTexas Supreme Court · 1969
  5. Manoogian v. Lake Forest Corp.Court of Appeals of Texas · 1983

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

3Cited by58 opinions

  1. Kutch v. Del Mar College, Texas Court of Appeals, 13th District1992
  2. Shaw v. County of Dallas, Texas Court of Appeals, 5th District (Dallas)2008
  3. Vincent v. Bank of America, N.A., Texas Court of Appeals, 5th District (Dallas)2003
  4. Hanley v. Hanley, Texas Court of Appeals, 5th District (Dallas)1991
  5. Daniel v. Kelley Oil Corp., Texas Court of Appeals, 1st District (Houston)1998

53 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