Legal Opinion

Diamond Shamrock Corp. v. Wendt

Texas Court of Appeals, 13th District

Decided October 9, 1986No. 13-85-148-CVPublishedCited by 15 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

SEERDEN, Justice.

Appellant complains of the judgment against it in a suit over the death of Wendt’s bull, named “Superman 1024,” which was killed on the premises of appel-lee, Medina Valley A.I. Laboratory, (Medina), by application of an insecticide, Vapo-na, manufactured by Diamond Shamrock Corporation (Shamrock) and applied to the bull by employees of Medina. Pursuant to jury answers to special issues, the trial court entered judgment, jointly and severally against Shamrock and Medina for $1,500,000 actual damages, and against Shamrock separately for $7,000,000 exemplary damages. The…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Patterson Dental Co. v. DunnTexas Supreme Court · 1979
  2. Garcia v. Central Power & Light Co.Texas Supreme Court · 1986
  3. Lopez v. Foremost Paving, Inc.Texas Supreme Court · 1986
  4. King v. MaldonadoCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1977
  5. Dean v. Texas Bitulithic Co.Court of Appeals of Texas · 1976

3Cited by15 opinions

  1. Kawamata Farms, Inc. v. United Agri ProductsHawaii Supreme Court · 1997
  2. Frank B. Hall & Co. v. Beach, Inc., Texas Court of Appeals, 13th District1987
  3. American Cyanamid Co. v. Frankson, Texas Court of Appeals, 13th District1987
  4. Moore v. Altra Energy Technologies, Inc., Texas Court of Appeals, 14th District (Houston)2010
  5. Dunlap v. Excel Corp., Texas Court of Appeals, 7th District (Amarillo)2000

10 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