Legal Opinion

Bayliss v. Cernock

Court of Appeals of Texas

Decided May 25, 1989No. B14-87-00800-CVPublishedCited by 15 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

. OPINION

ROBERTSON, Justice.

In this stockholders’ derivative action Geoffrey Bayliss, Donald Van Delinder, and Geochem Laboratories, Inc. alleged that Paul Cernock breached his fiduciary duty to Reservoirs, Inc. by issuing 3000 undervalued shares of its stock to himself and two directors of Reservoirs, Inc. The jury found Cernock breached his duty by issuing the undervalued stock and the trial court rendered judgment for the amount the stock was undervalued. In eighteen points of error Bayliss claims the trial court erred in (1) disregarding the answer to special issue number five concerning…

2Cases cited14 opinions

  1. Garza v. AlviarTexas Supreme Court · 1965
  2. McGalliard v. KuhlmannTexas Supreme Court · 1986
  3. Trenholm v. RatcliffTexas Supreme Court · 1983
  4. Phillips Petroleum Co. v. Stahl Petroleum Co.Texas Supreme Court · 1978
  5. McCain v. YostTexas Supreme Court · 1955

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

3Cited by15 opinions

  1. Stern v. State Ex Rel. AnselCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1994
  2. Lancer Corp. v. Murillo, Texas Court of Appeals, 4th District (San Antonio)1995
  3. White v. BathCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1992
  4. In Re Aguilar, Texas Court of Appeals, 8th District (El Paso)2011
  5. Gilmore v. StateCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1994

10 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