Legal Opinion

Chandler v. Hyundai Motor Co.

Texas Supreme Court

Decided May 6, 1992No. D-1836PublishedCited by 12 opinions

1Per curiam

We consider the appropriate appellate remedy concerning a trial court’s order limiting the public disclosure of certain documents.

In the underlying suit, Chloe Chandler alleged that a defective rear seat belt was a producing cause of her daughter’s death in a Hyundai Excel. She obtained discovery from Hyundai of a number of documents relating to the design and manufacture of the seat belt system. When Hyundai sought a protective order limiting the dissemination of this information to anyone not involved in this particular case, Chandler sought a hearing pursuant to Rule 76a, Texas Rules of…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Eli Lilly and Co. v. MarshallTexas Supreme Court · 1992

3Cited by12 opinions

  1. Davenport v. GarciaTexas Supreme Court · 1992
  2. General Tire, Inc. v. KeppleTexas Supreme Court · 1998
  3. Icon Benefit Adminstrators II, L.P. & American Administrative Group Inc v. Joella Mullin, Stanley Self, Andrea Davenport,et Al, Texas Court of Appeals, 5th District (Dallas)2013
  4. Marks v. Feldman, Texas Court of Appeals, 5th District (Dallas)1995
  5. General Tire, Inc. v. Kepple Ex Rel. Kepple, Texas Court of Appeals, 14th District (Houston)1996

7 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