Morrow v. Port Arthur Independent School District
Court of Appeals of Texas
1Concurring in part, dissenting in partKeith, Justice
I am in accord with the determination that defendant could have properly raised its jurisdictional point by a motion for summary judgment or by special exception under Tex.R.Civ.P. 90 (1967), as interpreted in McCamey v. Kinnear, 484 S.W.2d 150, 152-153 (Tex.Civ.App.—Beaumont 1972, writ ref’d n. r. e.). I do not agree that these two procedures are exclusive or that the trial court erred in dismissing the case because plaintiff’s pleadings failed to state a cause of action.
Plaintiff’s petition contains three numbered paragraphs and a prayer. The first paragraph identifies the parties. The…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Barr v. BernhardTexas Supreme Court · 1978
- McCamey v. KinnearCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1972
- Lone Star Gas Company v. MurchisonCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1962
- Campsey v. BrumleyTexas Commission of Appeals · 1932
- Coleman v. Beaumont Independent School DistrictCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1973
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.