Legal Opinion · Dissent

Priest v. Texas Animal Health Commission

Texas Court of Appeals, 5th District (Dallas)

Decided November 6, 1989No. 05-88-01417-CVPublished

1DissentHowell, Justice

I dissent. The majority opinion will not stand up to close analysis.(1) The majority concludes by affirming on grounds that “the trial court did not abuse its discretion.” The wrong test has been applied. Summary judgment will not lie unless the movant shows his entitlement thereto as a matter of law. It is error to award an injunction through the summary judgment process unless the movant’s proof is such that the trial court is wholly without discretion. Only where the summary judgment evidence is such that it demonstrates that the denial of relief would be a clear abuse of discretion may a…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Knopf v. Standard Fixtures Co., Inc.Court of Appeals of Texas · 1979
  2. Texas Employment Commission v. MartinezCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1976
  3. City of Houston v. Memorial Bend Utility CompanyCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1960
  4. Raine v. SearlesCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1957
  5. Gluck v. Texas Animal Health CommissionCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1973

3 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