Legal Opinion · Dissent

Exxon Corp. v. Tidwell

Texas Supreme Court

Decided December 8, 1993No. D-1639Published

1Dissent

GAMMAGE, Justice,

joined by

DOGGETT and SPECTOR, Justices, dissenting.

I disagree with adopting the new standard in this case, because I believe the evidence clearly supports the conclusion, under the new standard as well as the old, that Exxon exercised control over safety in the workplace. The majority conveniently rejects the old test and adopts the new one to accommodate Exxon as defendant when there is no justification to excuse Exxon from liability in this case. The majority errs in doing so, and I dissent.

This court long ago recognized the potential for oil companies to use “dealership”…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Garza v. AlviarTexas Supreme Court · 1965
  2. Humble Oil & Refining Co. v. MartinTexas Supreme Court · 1949
  3. Space City Oil Company v. McGilvrayCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1975
  4. O'NEILL v. Startex Petroleum, Inc.Court of Appeals of Texas · 1986

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

Powered by the Exa API