Legal Opinion · Dissent

In re Bustamante

Court of Appeals of Texas

Decided November 23, 2016No. 04-16-00333-CVPublished

1Dissent

DISSENTING OPINION

Luz Elena D. Chapa, Justice

I respectfully dissent.2 The majority adopts a new, rigid rule regarding motions for leave to designate responsible third parties (RTP motions) that is directly contrary to In re Prudential Insurance Company of America, 148 S.W.3d 124 (Tex. 2004). In Prudential, the Supreme Court of Texas required that we conduct a case-by-case benefits-and-detriments analysis and not adopt rigid rules to determine whether an appeal is an inadequate remedy. See id. at 136; see also In re H.E.B. Grocery Co., 492 S.W.3d 300, 304 (Tex. 2016) (orig. proceeding) (per…

2Cases cited19 opinions

  1. Walker v. PackerTexas Supreme Court · 1992
  2. In Re Prudential Insurance Co. of AmericaTexas Supreme Court · 2004
  3. In Re McAllen Medical Center, Inc.Texas Supreme Court · 2008
  4. In re H.E.B. Grocery Co.Texas Supreme Court · 2016
  5. In Re AIU Insurance Co.Texas Supreme Court · 2004

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