Legal Opinion

Water Doctors International, Inc. v. Lux

Court of Appeals of Texas

Decided October 23, 1997No. 12-96-00298-CVPublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

RAMEY, Chief Justice.

Appellants Water Doctors International, Inc. and Wakefield Marketing Group f/k/a Wakefield & Associates, Inc. (“Franchisors”) appeal a zero damages award arising from a counterclaim for the collection of two promissory notes against Appellees Michael Lux and Charles Riley ( sometimes referred to as “Franchisees”). Following a jury finding that the Franchisees had failed to comply with the promissory note each of them had executed in favor of Franchisors, the jury found Franchisors were entitled to zero dollars as damages. On appeal, Franchisors raise two points of error…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. In Re King's EstateTexas Supreme Court · 1951
  2. Cain v. BainTexas Supreme Court · 1986
  3. Pool v. Ford Motor Co.Texas Supreme Court · 1986
  4. Sterner v. Marathon Oil Co.Texas Supreme Court · 1989
  5. Victoria Bank & Trust Co. v. BradyTexas Supreme Court · 1991

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

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Albert Hambrick v. Foremost County Mutual Insurance, Texas Court of Appeals, 12th District (Tyler)2024
  2. Arturo Rodriguez v. Browning-Ferris Industries, Inc., Browning-Ferris Services, Inc., AKA, BFI, Inc., Texas Court of Appeals, 7th District (Amarillo)2007
  3. Arturo Rodriguez v. Browning-Ferris Industries, Inc., Browning-Ferris Services, Inc., AKA, BFI, Inc., Texas Court of Appeals, 7th District (Amarillo)2007
  4. Arturo Rodriguez v. Browning-Ferris Industries, Inc., Browning-Ferris Services, Inc., AKA, BFI, Inc., Texas Court of Appeals, 7th District (Amarillo)2007
  5. Rosa Elena Ramos v. Hein John Luu, Texas Court of Appeals, 7th District (Amarillo)2003

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API