Sep. 28, 2007 Supreme Court Opinions (Tex. 2007)

Texas Supreme Court hands down two signed opinions - authored by Justice Wainwright and Justice Johnson - and decides two more sovereign immunity cases per curiam.

National Plan Administrators, Inc. v. National Health Ins. Co.,
No. 05‑0006 (Tex. Sep. 28, 2007)(Johnson)(commercial law, contract, insurance code, thirda party administrator, no fiduciary duty)
NATIONAL PLAN ADMINISTRATORS, INC. AND CRS MARKETING AGENCY, INC. v. NATIONAL HEALTH INSURANCE COMPANY; from Travis County; 3rd district (03‑03‑00306‑CV, 150 SW3d 718, 09‑10‑04)2 petitions
The Court reverses the court of appeals' judgment and renders judgment.
Justice Johnson delivered the opinion of the Court.

Texas Parks & Wildlife Dep't v. E.E. Lowrey Realty, Ltd.,
No. 05‑0157 (Tex. Sep. 28, 2007)(per curiam)(sovereign immunity, official capacity claims)
THE TEXAS PARKS AND WILDLIFE DEPARTMENT, DOUG HAMMIT, AND MARVIN C. WILLS, JR. v. E.E. LOWREY REALTY, LTD. D/B/A GATESVILLE STORAGE AND THE ESTATE OF E.E. LOWERY; from Coryell County; 10th district (10‑02‑00317‑CV, 155 SW3d 456, 11‑03‑04)
Pursuant to Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 59.1, after granting the petition for review and without hearing oral argument, the Court reverses in part the court of appeals' judgment and renders judgment. Per Curiam Opinion.

A.G. Edwards & Sons, Inc. v. Beyer, No. 05‑0580 (Tex. Sep. 28, 2007)(Wainwright)(consumer law, financial services, breach of contract, joint account with right of survivorship, Texas Probate Code, attorney's fees)
A.G. EDWARDS & SONS, INC. v. MARIA ALICIA BEYER; from El Paso County; 8th district (08‑03‑00495‑CV, 170 SW3d 684, 06‑30‑05)
The Court affirms the court of appeals' judgment in part, reverses in part, and remands the case to the trial court. Justice Wainwright delivered the opinion of the Court.

Lamesa ISD v. Booe dba Booe Roofing Co., No. 05‑0959 (Tex. Sep. 28, 2007)(per curiam)(sovereign immunity to breach of contract claim, opportunity to amend, citing Koseoglu, Tooke progeny)
LAMESA INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT v. DAVID BOOE D/B/A BOOE ROOFING COMPANY; from Dawson County; 11th district (11‑03‑00394‑CV, ___ SW3d ___, 08‑31‑05)
Pursuant to Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 59.1, after granting the petition for review and without hearing oral argument, the Court reverses the court of appeals' judgment and remands the case to that court. Per Curiam Opinion.

Supreme Court Justices Circle the Wagons and Refuse to Recuse - Recusal motion cited evidence of rampant bias in favor of defendants in tort cases

Sep. 21, 2007 - Recusal motion in wrongful death appeal quoted findings of study by law professor who conducted systematic quantitative and qualitative analysis of disposition patters of tort cases decided by the Texas Supreme Court 2004-05
See Anderson, David A.,[mailto:danderson@mail.law.utexas.edu] "Judicial Tort Reform in Texas" . Review of Litigation, 2007 Abstract available from SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=976114

No. 06‑0416
IN RE COLUMBIA MEDICAL CENTER OF LAS COLINAS, SUBSIDIARY, L.P. D/B/A LAS COLINAS MEDICAL CENTER, ANTONETTE CONNER, AND ANNA MATHEW; from Dallas County; 5th district (05‑06‑00611‑CV, ___ SW3d ___, 05‑12‑06)
Real parties in interest's motion to recuse denied in accordance with Tex. R. App. P. 16.3(b)

OPINION BELOW:

In Re Columbia Medical Center of Las Colinas (Tex.App.- Dallas 2006)(orig. proc.)

Writ of Mandamus Denied; Opinion Issued May 12, 2006

In The Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

............................ No. 05-06-00611-CV ............................

IN RE COLUMBIA MEDICAL CENTER OF LAS COLINAS, SUBSIDIARY, L.P.D/B/A LAS COLINAS MEDICAL CENTER, ANTONETTE CONNER, AND ANNA MATHEW, Relators

Original Proceeding from the 192nd Judicial District CourtDallas County,
TexasTrial Court Cause Nos. 02-05307-K

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Before Justices Whittington, FitzGerald, and Lang-MiersOpinion By Justice Whittington

Relators assert the trial judge abused his discretion in granting a motion for new trial after a jury had found in relators' favor in a medical negligence lawsuit. The trial judge granted the new trial solely “in the interests of justice and fairness”. The trial judge's explanation for the granting of the new trial was sufficient. See In re Volkswagen of Am., Inc., 22 S.W.3d 462 (Tex. 2000)(orig. proceeding) and In re Bayerische Motoren Werke, AG, 8 S.W.3d 326 (Tex. 2000) (orig. proceeding).

Accordingly, relators' petition for writ of mandamus is DENIED.
See Tex. R. App. P. 52.8(a).

MARK WHITTINGTON
JUSTICE