Legal Opinion

Medical Protective Co. v. Glanz

Texas Court of Appeals, 13th District

Decided October 16, 1986No. 13-85-501-CVPublishedCited by 35 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

SEERDEN, Justice.

Appellant contests the trial court’s action • in striking appellant’s pleadings, granting a take-nothing default judgment, entering a declaratory judgment against appellant establishing the existence of certain insurance coverage, and awarding appellee $28,-054.00 in attorney’s fees and expenses, post-judgment interest and court costs. The trial court’s actions were all sanctions for discovery abuse under TEX.R.CIV.P. 215. We affirm.

Appellant (Medical Protective) provided medical malpractice insurance for appellee (Glanz). Pursuant to the insurance contract, counsel…

2Cases cited21 opinions

  1. Downer v. Aquamarine Operators, Inc.Texas Supreme Court · 1985
  2. Woodson v. North CarolinaSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
  3. National Hockey League v. Metropolitan Hockey Club, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1976
  4. Craddock v. Sunshine Bus Lines, Inc.Texas Supreme Court · 1939
  5. Roberts v. LouisianaSupreme Court of the United States · 1976

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

3Cited by35 opinions

  1. Koslow's v. MacKieTexas Supreme Court · 1990
  2. Remington Arms Co., Inc. v. CaldwellTexas Supreme Court · 1993
  3. Sterling v. Alexander, Texas Court of Appeals, 14th District (Houston)2003
  4. Paradigm Oil, Inc. v. Retamco Operating, Inc., Texas Court of Appeals, 4th District (San Antonio)2005
  5. Rodriguez Ex Rel. Rodriguez v. Hyundai Motor Co., Texas Court of Appeals, 13th District1997

30 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