In Shaw v. Radionic Industries, Inc., the plaintiff moved for summary judgment against the pro se defendant on a claim for a suit on a sworn account. The court set a hearing for the motion on April 2, 2007. Later, the plaintiff sent a transmittal letter dated March 22, 2007 to the defendant to
judgment
Judicial Estoppel vs. Judicial Admission
The Beaumont Court of Appeals recently addressed the difference between judicial estoppel and a judicial admission. Plaintiff filed a claim with the EEOC and brought suit against defendant for gender discrimination. After her federal suit was dismissed, she sued the defendant in state court for unlawful termination based on her refusal to perform an illegal act. …
Notice of Service After Case Dismissed for Want of Prosecution
A plaintiff sued a defendant for breach of contract. Instead of serving the defendant, the plaintiff served the Secretary of State. As the time for answering lapsed, the trial court sent notice of dismissal to the parties (according to Texas Rule 165a ) warning them of dismissal if no answer was filed by a specified deadline.…
No-Evidence MSJ Need Only Reference Challenged Element
The Texarkana Court of Appeals held that a no-evidence motion for summary judgment need only identify the challenged element in order to comply with Rule 166a(i). Plaintiff argued that the motion must list all of the elements and identify the challenged element(s). The court of appeals disagreed and held the motion sufficient if it "merely reference[s] the element…
Motions for Summary Judgment and the Specificity Requirement
The defendant moved for summary judgment on the plaintiff’s claims based on the statute of limitations. To show the accrual date, the defendant attached several documents to his motion. But the defendant’s motion did not specifically identify where the evidence was in those documents. Did this meet the summary judgment requirement that a party must specifically identify its…
