Legal Opinion

Rio Grande Valley Sugar Growers, Inc. v. Campesi

Texas Supreme Court

Decided December 31, 1979No. B-8470PublishedCited by 54 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

BARROW, Justice.

The determinative question presented by this appeal is the validity of a provision for liquidated damages contained in a marketing agreement agreed to by respondent, Ross Campesi, and petitioner, a co-operative marketing association. The trial court concluded that the provision was invalid and sustained Campesi’s motion for partial summary judgment. It entered a final judgment after a jury trial of the remaining issue in the cause. The court of civil appeals affirmed. .580 S.W.2d 850. We conclude that the provision is valid and, therefore, the partial summary judgment was…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Stewart v. BaseyTexas Supreme Court · 1952
  2. Texas Farm Bureau Cotton Ass'n v. StovallTexas Supreme Court · 1923
  3. Cowan v. WoodrumTexas Supreme Court · 1971
  4. Rio Grande Valley Sugar Growers, Inc. v. CampesiCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1979
  5. Texas Farm Bureau Cotton Ass'n v. WilliamsTexas Supreme Court · 1927

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

3Cited by54 opinions

  1. Valence Operating Co. v. DorsettTexas Supreme Court · 2005
  2. Phillips v. PhillipsTexas Supreme Court · 1992
  3. Chilton Insurance Co. v. Pate & Pate Enterprises, Inc., Texas Court of Appeals, 4th District (San Antonio)1996
  4. FPL Energy, LLC v. TXU Portfolio Management Co.Texas Supreme Court · 2014
  5. Hamilton v. Texas Oil & Gas Corp.Court of Appeals of Texas · 1982

49 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