Legal Opinion
Bolling v. Texas Animal Health Commission
Texas Court of Appeals, 13th District
Decided September 18, 1986No. 13-86-013-CVPublishedCited by 4 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
NYE, Chief Justice.
The Texas Animal Health Commission (TAHC) sought an injunction to tag and brand the cattle belonging to appellant Richard Bolling that had been exposed to Brucellosis. The trial court granted TAHC’s motion for summary judgment. The court ordered Bolling to have his reactor cattle “tagged, ‘B’ branded, and moved for immediate slaughter to a slaughtering establishment where Federal or State meat inspection is maintained_” Bolling appeals complaining that “[t]he trial court reversibly erred by granting plaintiff summary judgment which precluded defendant from litigating…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Ferguson v. SkrupaSupreme Court of the United States · 1963
- Exxon Corp. v. Governor of MarylandSupreme Court of the United States · 1978
- Andrus v. AllardSupreme Court of the United States · 1979
- Teer v. DuddlestenTexas Supreme Court · 1984
- United States v. Coastal States Crude Gathering CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1981
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- Winters v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1990
- Tag Resources, Inc. v. Petroleum Well Services, Inc., Texas Court of Appeals, 9th District (Beaumont)1990
- Richard M. Young, Jr. A/K/A Richard Young v. Texas Parks and Wildlife Department, John Silovsky as Wildlife Division Director of Texas Parks and Wildlife Department, and the State of Texas, Texas Court of Appeals, 15th District2025
- Tag Resources, Inc. v. Petroleum Well Services, Inc., Texas Court of Appeals, 9th District (Beaumont)1990