Legal Opinion

Withem v. Underwood

Texas Supreme Court

Decided June 28, 1996No. 95-0697PublishedCited by 14 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

2Per curiam

In this malicious prosecution case, Joe Underwood sought damages from Dillard’s Department Store and its employee, William Withem. Counsel for Dillard’s filed answers on behalf of both defendants, although With-em’s whereabouts were unknown. Later, the trial court granted Dillard’s motion for summary judgment but struck Withem’s pleadings and granted Underwood’s motion for partial summary judgment on liability. Withem did not appear at the trial on damages, and the trial court rendered judgment against him for $633,158.75. The attorney who had filed Withem’s answer next filed a…

3Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Stubbs v. StubbsTexas Supreme Court · 1985
  2. Texaco, Inc. v. Central Power & Light Co.Texas Supreme Court · 1996
  3. Lawyers Lloyds v. WebbTexas Supreme Court · 1941

4Cited by14 opinions

  1. Clopton v. Chi-Suk PakCourt of Appeals of Texas · 2001
  2. Aviation Composite Technologies, Inc. v. CLB Corp.Court of Appeals of Texas · 2004
  3. Ex Parte Stiles, Texas Court of Appeals, 10th District (Waco)1997
  4. Bird v. First Deposit National Bank, Texas Court of Appeals, 8th District (El Paso)1999
  5. Subsequent Injury Fund v. Service Lloyds Insurance Co., Texas Court of Appeals, 1st District (Houston)1998

9 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