Legal Opinion
Clear Lake City Water Authority v. Salazar
Court of Appeals of Texas
Decided October 12, 1989No. B14-89-00302-CVPublishedCited by 18 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
SEARS, Justice.
In this case of first impression we must decide whether the members of a water authority are susceptible to judicial inquiry into their subjective thought processes. We hold that they are not.
I. BACKGROUND
Relators, officials of the Clear Lake City Water Authority, seek a writ of mandamus to compel the Honorable Felix Salazar, Jr. to replace his discovery order against them with a protective order precluding scrutiny of their thought processes. The real party in interest, Irving Kaplan, is the plaintiff in a tort action against relators. Kaplan’s suit challenges the…
2Cases cited18 opinions
- Downer v. Aquamarine Operators, Inc.Texas Supreme Court · 1985
- Tenney v. BrandhoveSupreme Court of the United States · 1951
- Craddock v. Sunshine Bus Lines, Inc.Texas Supreme Court · 1939
- Morrison v. OlsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1988
- Kilbourn v. ThompsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1881
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by18 opinions
- Joe v. Two Thirty Nine Joint VentureTexas Supreme Court · 2004
- Camacho v. Samaniego, Texas Court of Appeals, 8th District (El Paso)1997
- In Re PerryTexas Supreme Court · 2001
- Ware v. Miller, Texas Court of Appeals, 7th District (Amarillo)2002
- Shell Oil Co. v. SmithCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1991
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.