Legal Opinion

H.E. Butt Grocery Co. v. Warner

Texas Supreme Court

Decided January 27, 1993No. D-1476PublishedCited by 102 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

CORNYN, Justice.

This slip and fall case concerns the pleading arid requested submission requirements for independent, alternative theories of recovery. The trial court submitted only the plaintiff’s (Warner’s) premises liability theory, which the jury answered favorably to H.E.B. Based upon its holding that Warner was erroneously denied submission of an additional theory of recovery, the court of appeals reversed the trial court’s take-nothing judgment and remanded the cause for a new trial. 820 S.W.2d 819. Because we hold that Warner pleaded and requested submission of only a premises…

Also in this document: Concurrence.

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Keetch v. Kroger Co.Texas Supreme Court · 1992
  2. Texas Department of Human Services v. E.B.Texas Supreme Court · 1990
  3. Corbin v. Safeway Stores, Inc.Texas Supreme Court · 1983
  4. Warner v. H.E. Butt Grocery Co.Court of Appeals of Texas · 1991

3Cited by102 opinions

  1. Clayton W. Williams, Jr., Inc. v. OlivoTexas Supreme Court · 1997
  2. Westgate, Ltd. v. StateTexas Supreme Court · 1992
  3. United Scaffolding, Inc. v. James LevineTexas Supreme Court · 2017
  4. Pitman v. Lightfoot, Texas Court of Appeals, 4th District (San Antonio)1996
  5. Occidental Chemical Corp. v. JenkinsTexas Supreme Court · 2016

97 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