Legal Opinion

in Re Toyota Motor Sales, U.S.A., Inc. and Viscount Properties II, L.P., D/B/A Hoy Fox toyota/lexus

Texas Supreme Court

Decided August 30, 2013No. 10-0933PublishedCited by 134 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtChief Justice Jefferson

We have recently held that a trial court must explain with reasonable specificity *749why it has set aside a jury verdict and granted anew trial.1 Without such an explanation, parties in the case can only speculate about why the court ostensibly circumvented a critical constitutional right. The parties — and the public — are entitled to know why the trial court believes an injustice would occur if the jury’s verdict were to stand. In this case, the jury returned a verdict, and the trial court rendered a judgment in conformity with it. The trial court then ordered a new trial. The order is…

2Cases cited19 opinions

  1. Pool v. Ford Motor Co.Texas Supreme Court · 1986
  2. Johnson v. Fourth Court of AppealsTexas Supreme Court · 1985
  3. In Re Columbia Medical Center of Las Colinas, Subsidiary, L.P.Texas Supreme Court · 2009
  4. Southwestern Bell Telephone Co. v. GarzaTexas Supreme Court · 2004
  5. Bay Area Healthcare Group, Ltd. v. McShaneTexas Supreme Court · 2007

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

3Cited by134 opinions

  1. United Scaffolding, Inc. v. James LevineTexas Supreme Court · 2017
  2. in Re Stacey Bent and Mark BentTexas Supreme Court · 2016
  3. In re DavenportTexas Supreme Court · 2017
  4. in Re: Zimmer, Inc., Texas Court of Appeals, 5th District (Dallas)2014
  5. in Re Whataburger Restaurants LpTexas Supreme Court · 2014

129 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