Hernandez v. Montgomery Ward & Co.
Texas Supreme Court
1DissentKilgarlin, Justice
I respectfully dissent.
I would affirm the court of appeals’ holding that Montgomery Ward’s objection to special issue number one was preserved. However, I believe that special issue number one, as submitted, was correct and the court of appeals should not have reversed on this ground. Unfortunately, Ms. Hernandez failed to assign this part of the court of appeals’ decision as error. Had she *926preserved error on this point, I would concur with the result reached by the majority.
The history of Rule 272 of the Texas Rules of Civil Procedure, evidences periodic liberalizing changes. Prior to 1941…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Emmett E. Page v. St. Louis Southwestern Railway CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1965
- Members Mutual Insurance Co. v. MuckelroyCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1975
- Big Three Welding Equipment Company v. RobertsCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1966
- Hyder-Ingram Chevrolet, Inc. v. KutachCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1981
- Lone Star Steel Co. v. WahlCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1982
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.