Legal Opinion · Concurrence

Vinson Minerals, Ltd. v. XTO Energy, Inc.

Texas Court of Appeals, 2nd District (Fort Worth)

Decided December 16, 2010No. 02-08-00453-CVPublished

1ConcurrenceTerrie Livingston, Chief Justice

I respectfully concur with the majority opinion and write separately only to make some distinctions regarding the rule 408 admissibility question raised by the Vin-sons’ May 12, 2006 “demand” letter and the sufficiency of their “election of forfeiture.” See Tex.R. Evid. 408.

Texas Rule of Evidence 408 mandates exclusion of evidence of settlement offers unless offered for some reason other than to establish liability. Id. Additionally, the burden is on the objecting party to show that the evidence was not offered for some other reason or purpose allowed by rule 408. See In re Univar USA, Inc.,…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Coastal Oil & Gas Corp. v. Roberts, Texas Court of Appeals, 13th District2000
  2. In Re Univar USA, Inc., Texas Court of Appeals, 9th District (Beaumont)2010

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API