Legal Opinion

Vanscot Concrete Co. v. Bailey

Court of Appeals of Texas

Decided November 20, 1992No. 2-91-222-CVPublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

FARRIS, Justice.

The issue in this case is whether or not an appeal can be brought in the name of a nonexisting appellant. We hold that it cannot and order the appeal dismissed.

This is a ghost story with two ghosts. One is the specter of limitations; neither party’s brief mentions it, but it is a specter that is never out of mind. The named appellant, Vanscot Concrete Company, is the other ghost.

Vanscot Concrete Company was merged into Tarmac Texas, Inc., on June 30, 1986, and after that did not exist. Three months later, on October 4,1986, the appellee, Wallace Bailey, Jr., was injured…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Rooke v. JensonTexas Supreme Court · 1992
  2. Stinson v. KingCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1935
  3. Hunt v. BurrageCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1935
  4. Onion v. CainCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1933

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Bailey v. Vanscot Concrete Co.Texas Supreme Court · 1995
  2. Vanscot Concrete Co. v. BaileyCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1993
  3. Vanscot Concrete Co. v. BaileyTexas Supreme Court · 1993
  4. Vanscot Concrete Co. v. BaileyCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1993

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

Powered by the Exa API