Legal Opinion
Sweco, Inc. v. Continental Sulfur & Chemical
Texas Court of Appeals, 8th District (El Paso)
Decided April 3, 1991No. 08-89-00411-CVPublishedCited by 10 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
OSBORN, Chief Justice.
This appeal is from a judgment, based upon a jury verdict, awarding damages arising from the sale of a grinding mill which was to be used to process sulfur for sale in small particles. We affirm in part and reverse and render in part.
FACTS
Continental Sulfur and Chemical is in the business of purchasing, processing and selling sulfur and other chemicals. Initially, the company bought and sold molten sulfur. In 1985, it built a plant to process molten sulfur into processed sulfur for sale to specialty manufacturers. This process whereby the solid sulfur was reduced…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- In Re King's EstateTexas Supreme Court · 1951
- Garza v. AlviarTexas Supreme Court · 1965
- Custom Leasing, Inc. v. Texas Bank & Trust Co. of DallasTexas Supreme Court · 1974
- Wilson v. JonesTexas Commission of Appeals · 1932
- Oilwell Division, United States Steel Corp. v. FryerTexas Supreme Court · 1973
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by10 opinions
- Microsoft Corp. v. Manning, Texas Court of Appeals, 6th District (Texarkana)1995
- Polaris Industries, Inc. v. McDonald, Texas Court of Appeals, 12th District (Tyler)2003
- JHC Ventures, L.P. v. Fast Trucking, Inc., Texas Court of Appeals, 4th District (San Antonio)2002
- PPG Industries, Inc. v. JMB/Houston Centers Partners Ltd. Partnership, Texas Court of Appeals, 14th District (Houston)2001
- Hci Chemicals (Usa), Inc. v. Henkel Kgaa, Defendant-Third Party v. Empresa Naviera Santa, S.A., Third PartyCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1992
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.