Legal Opinion

Palais Royal, Inc. v. Partida

Texas Court of Appeals, 13th District

Decided February 8, 1996No. 13-95-529-CVPublishedCited by 12 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

SEERDEN, Chief Justice.

This application for mandamus illustrates some of the serious, continuing problems inherent in the current legal procedures relating to class action litigation. Rule 42 allows one or more persons as members of a class to sue or be sued as representative parties of a class if it is so numerous that joinder of all members is impracticable, where there are questions of law or fact common to the class, the claims or defenses of the representative parties are typical of the class, and the representative parties will fairly and adequately protect the interests of the…

2Cases cited13 opinions

  1. Canadian Helicopters Ltd. v. WittigTexas Supreme Court · 1994
  2. Board of School Comm'rs of Indianapolis v. JacobsSupreme Court of the United States · 1975
  3. Braden v. DowneyTexas Supreme Court · 1991
  4. American Express Travel Related Services Co. v. Walton, Texas Court of Appeals, 5th District (Dallas)1994
  5. Jennings v. Minco Technology Labs, Inc.Court of Appeals of Texas · 1989

8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by12 opinions

  1. America Online, Inc. v. Williams, Texas Court of Appeals, 14th District (Houston)1998
  2. In the Interest of M.M.O.Court of Appeals of Texas · 1998
  3. Grizzle Ex Rel. Grizzle v. Texas Commerce Bank, N.A., Texas Court of Appeals, 5th District (Dallas)2001
  4. Roach v. IngramCourt of Appeals of Texas · 2018
  5. Sears v. Olivarez, Texas Court of Appeals, 13th District2000

7 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