Legal Opinion

in Re Wade Meeker, James Meeker, Barney Holland, as Independent of the Estate of Lawrence H. Meeker, and Natasha Wesson

Texas Court of Appeals, 2nd District (Fort Worth)

Decided June 29, 2016No. 02-16-00103-CVPublished

1Opinion of the Court

COURT OF APPEALS SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS FORT WORTH NO. 02-16-00103-CV IN RE WADE MEEKER; JAMES RELATORS MEEKER; BARNEY HOLLAND, AS INDEPENDENT EXECUTOR OF THE ESTATE OF LAWRENCE H. MEEKER; AND NATASHA WESSON ------------ ORIGINAL PROCEEDING TRIAL COURT NO. 2014-PR01451-2-B ---------- DISSENTING OPINION ---------- I. INTRODUCTION Because Real Party in Interest Alan Meeker (Alan) lacks standing to assert the “potential claim or suit” he seeks to investigate by virtue of his “Verified Rule 202 Petition for Deposition and Subpoena Duces Tecum to Investigate Potential Claims,” I would hold that…

2Cases cited18 opinions

  1. In Re Prudential Insurance Co. of AmericaTexas Supreme Court · 2004
  2. Lopez v. Muñoz, Hockema & Reed, L.L.P.Texas Supreme Court · 2000
  3. In Re JordenTexas Supreme Court · 2008
  4. Carle v. CarleTexas Supreme Court · 1950
  5. Trevino v. TurcotteTexas Supreme Court · 1978

13 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