Legal Opinion
Stein v. Deason
Texas Court of Appeals, 5th District (Dallas)
Decided April 21, 2005No. 05-03-01812-CVPublishedCited by 11 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION NUNC PRO TUNC
Opinion by
Justice LANG.
We withdraw our January 10, 2005 opinion and issue this nunc pro tunc opinion in its place to correct the style of this case. The judgment remains unchanged.
In a single issue in this interlocutory appeal, Gordon Stein d/b/a Stein & Associates contends the trial court erred in overruling his special appearance in a suit brought by Darwin Deason. See Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem.Code Ann. § 51.014(a)(7) (Vernon 2004-05). For the following reasons, we resolve Stein’s issue against him and affirm the trial court’s order.
I. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND
In…
2Cases cited25 opinions
- International Shoe Co. v. WashingtonSupreme Court of the United States · 1945
- Burger King Corp. v. RudzewiczSupreme Court of the United States · 1985
- World-Wide Volkswagen Corp. v. WoodsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1980
- Helicopteros Nacionales De Colombia, S. A. v. HallSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
- BMC Software Belgium, NV v. MarchandTexas Supreme Court · 2002
20 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by11 opinions
- Horizon Shipbuilding, Inc. v. BLYN II HOLDING, LLC, Texas Court of Appeals, 14th District (Houston)2010
- Barnhill v. Automated Shrimp Corp., Texas Court of Appeals, 10th District (Waco)2007
- Petrie v. Widby, Texas Court of Appeals, 5th District (Dallas)2006
- Camac v. DontosCourt of Appeals of Texas · 2012
- Barnhill v. Automated Shrimp Corp., Texas Court of Appeals, 10th District (Waco)2007
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.