Champlin Petroleum Co. v. Heinz
Texas Court of Appeals, 13th District
1DissentKennedy, Justice
I respectfully dissent. I believe that the majority opinion has incorrectly evaluated the law and the facts of this case concerning the application of TEX.BUS. & COMM. CODE ANN. § 17.56 (Vernon Supp.1983). In its opinion, the majority states that, “[t]he legal test applied to determine whether a defendant has a fixed and established place of business under the provision of § 17.56 of the Deceptive Trade Practices Act is virtually identical for determining whether it had ‘an agency or representative’ under art. 1995, subdivision 27.” I disagree. Had the legislature intended for venue under the…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Ford Motor Credit Company v. Robert L. Weaver, John C. Weaver and Sons and Weaver Farms, DefendantsCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1982
- In the Matter of P.S. Products Corp., Bankrupt v. Equilease CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1970
- Watsco, Inc. v. Henry Valve CompanyDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1964
- First Title Co. of Corpus Christi v. CookCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1981
- Railex Corp. v. White Machine Co.District Court, E.D. New York · 1965