Legal Opinion

King v. Graham

Texas Court of Appeals, 4th District (San Antonio)

Decided February 14, 2001No. 04-98-00464-CVPublishedCited by 20 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

TOM RICKHOFF, Justice.

We grant the appellees and cross-appellants’ motion for rehearing en banc. Our opinion and judgment of January 12, 2000 on appellants’ motion for rehearing is withdrawn, and the following opinion and judgment are substituted.

NATURE OF THE CASE .

Allan R. King, Donald E. Holley, and F. Edward Barker appeal from a jury verdict rendered in favor of Phillip E. Graham and Thomas Michael Wren. On appeal, King, Holley and Barker argue that the evidence is legally and factually insufficient to support the jury’s findings of malicious prosecution and damages and assert that…

2Cases cited21 opinions

  1. In Re King's EstateTexas Supreme Court · 1951
  2. Cain v. BainTexas Supreme Court · 1986
  3. Formosa Plastics Corp. USA v. Presidio Engineers and Contractors, Inc.Texas Supreme Court · 1998
  4. Leitch v. HornsbyTexas Supreme Court · 1996
  5. Parkway Co. v. WoodruffTexas Supreme Court · 1995

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

3Cited by20 opinions

  1. King v. GrahamTexas Supreme Court · 2003
  2. San Antonio Credit Union v. O'CONNOR, Texas Court of Appeals, 4th District (San Antonio)2003
  3. Wellisch v. United Services Automobile Ass'n, Texas Court of Appeals, 4th District (San Antonio)2002
  4. In Re GRAND JURY PROCEEDINGS 198.GJ.20, Texas Court of Appeals, 4th District (San Antonio)2003
  5. Gunnels v. City of Brownfield, Texas Court of Appeals, 7th District (Amarillo)2004

15 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