Legal Opinion
Clark Equipment Co. v. Pitner
Texas Court of Appeals, 14th District (Houston)
Decided June 6, 1996No. 14-94-00431-CVPublishedCited by 11 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
EDELMAN, Justice.
In this personal injury case, Clark Equipment Company (“Clark”) appeals from a judgment entered in favor of Rebecca Ann Pitner on the grounds that (1) an expert was allowed to testify even though the substance of his testimony was not provided in interrogatory answers, (2) expert testimony on causation was improperly excluded, (3) psychiatric evidence was improperly excluded, (4) counsel made improper, incurable and prejudicial jury argument, (5) there was no evidence or insufficient evidence to support the jury’s finding of a marketing defect, (6) there was no…
2Cases cited28 opinions
- City of Brownsville v. AlvaradoTexas Supreme Court · 1995
- Ortiz v. JonesTexas Supreme Court · 1996
- Burroughs Wellcome Co. v. CryeTexas Supreme Court · 1995
- Birchfield v. Texarkana Memorial HospitalTexas Supreme Court · 1987
- La Sara Grain Co. v. First National Bank of MercedesTexas Supreme Court · 1984
23 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by11 opinions
- Clark v. Bres, Texas Court of Appeals, 14th District (Houston)2007
- Metropolitan Life Insurance Co. v. Haney, Texas Court of Appeals, 14th District (Houston)1999
- Castillo v. American Garment Finishers Corp., Texas Court of Appeals, 8th District (El Paso)1998
- Bean v. Baxter Healthcare Corp., Texas Court of Appeals, 14th District (Houston)1998
- Sears, Roebuck & Co. v. Kunze, Texas Court of Appeals, 9th District (Beaumont)1999
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.