Legal Opinion

Isern v. Ninth Court of Appeals

Texas Supreme Court

Decided August 16, 1996No. 96-0330PublishedCited by 19 opinions

1Per curiam

This mandamus action questions whether Rule 47(b)(1) of the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure and section 52.002 of the Texas Civil Practice and Remedies Code conflict and, thus, preclude a trial court from allowing alternate security in appeals from personal injury judgments. We conclude that these provisions do not conflict. Therefore, the trial court did not abuse its discretion by allowing Dr. Reuben A. Isern to post alternate security in the present case. We also conclude that Isern has no adequate remedy by appeal. Accordingly, we grant leave to file and conditionally grant the writ of…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Walker v. PackerTexas Supreme Court · 1992
  2. Johnson v. Fourth Court of AppealsTexas Supreme Court · 1985
  3. Texaco, Inc. v. Pennzoil, Co., Texas Court of Appeals, 1st District (Houston)1987
  4. Udolf v. Plan & Zoning Commission of West HartfordSupreme Court of the United States · 1988
  5. Laird v. King, Texas Court of Appeals, 9th District (Beaumont)1993

3Cited by19 opinions

  1. Ramco Oil & Gas, Ltd. v. Anglo Dutch (Tenge) L.L.C., Texas Court of Appeals, 14th District (Houston)2005
  2. LMC Complete Automotive, Inc. v. Burke, Texas Court of Appeals, 1st District (Houston)2007
  3. In Re SmithTexas Supreme Court · 2006
  4. In Re Kajima International, Inc., Texas Court of Appeals, 13th District2004
  5. In Re Williams, Texas Court of Appeals, 13th District2010

14 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