The Court is not issuing its normal weekly orders this week. The last orders for the 2008 Term issued on December 19th.

The Court should resume its normal schedule next week.

The Court issued five merits decisions with today’s order list.

• Southwestern Bell Telephone Co., L.P. v. Mitchell, No. 05-0171. This judgment had a 5-3 split, with Justice Hecht writing the majority opinion and the Chief Justice writing the dissenting opinion. (Justice Green did not sit.)

• Dallas Area Rapid Transit v. Amalgamated Transit Union Local No. 1338, No. 06-0034. Justice Hecht wrote for a unanimous court.

• United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co. v. Goudeau, No. 06-0987. This is a 6-3 decision, with Justice Brister writing the majority opinion and Justice Green writing the dissenting opinion.

• In re Rolando Caballero, No. 07-0484. The Court ultimately affirmed the judgment of disbarment in this attorney-discipline appeal, but the Justices were divided. Seven Justices signed onto this majority opinion by Justice Green. Justice Willett, joined by Justice Medina, dissented.

• Gardner v. U.S. Imaging, Inc., No. 08-0268 (per curiam)

Southwestern Bell Telephone Co. v. Mitchell looks like a very significant case about the role of the Texas Supreme Court in relation to the Texas Legislature. I’ll write a little more about that in a separate post.

Grants

The Court also granted the petition for review in Hagen v. Hagen, No. 07-1065 (DB), from Bexar County. That case is now set for oral argument on January 14, 2009. (( The counsel here got hit with a doubly whammy. The Court not only gave just about the minimum amount of time to prepare for oral argument, but that period spans the holidays. ))

CVSG, Texas Style

And the Court added a new category heading in this order list — “Solicitor General Invited To File Brief.” More on that a little later today.

It was a relatively quiet in this week’s orders list.

In a quirky list, the Court struck some petitions for failure to comply with the briefing rules, reinstated another that was previously dismissed, denied some motions for rehearing, and denied a stay. The most common single disposition in the Court’s toolkit — “pet. denied” — was not used today.

The Court’s next oral argument sitting begins on January 13, 2009.

The Texas Supreme Court released four decisions with today’s order list:

• In re GlobalSantaFe Corp., No. 07-0400 (Justice Willett)

• In re General Electric Co., No. 07-0195 (Justice Johnson)

• Texas Department of Transportation v. York, No. 07-0743 (per curiam)

• AutoZone, Inc. v. Reyes, No. 07-0773 (per curiam)

The Texas Supreme Court set two new (related) petitions for argument this January:

• Holmes v. Beatty, No. 07-0784 (DocketDB), consolidated for oral argument with Holmes v. Beatty, No. 07-0785 (DocketDB)

And the Court denied review in some other petitions that have been mentioned on this blog, including:

• Abbott v. State Bar of Texas, No. 07-0836 (DocketDB), involving whether certain information about attorneys is public information subject to the Public Information Act

• Gulf Insurance Co. v. Chad Hennings, No. 08-0202 (DocketDB), involving workers compensation benefits for an injury suffered by a former Dallas Cowboys lineman

I will be out of the office the rest of the morning, so further thoughts about these cases will have to come later.

The Texas Supreme Court released two decisions with today’s order list. The Court also granted review in two other cases.

It may have been “Oilfield Day” at the Court, with both of today’s decisions connected to the drilling industry. One decides what happens when a single lease that is part of a pooling arrangement expires. The other decides which law applied to a particular oilfield accident that occurred in Louisiana. Justice Brister wrote both opinions, both for unanimous courts.

• Wagner Brown, Ltd., et al. v. Jane Turner Sheppard, Individually and as Independent Executrix of the Estate of Sybil Turner, Deceased, No. 06-0845 (Justice Willett not sitting)

• Sonat Exploration Co. v. Cudd Pressure Control, Inc., No. 06-0979.

I’ll have some thoughts on these cases in a later post, either this afternoon or this weekend.

Two New Petitions Granted

The Court granted two petitions for review with today’s orders. Both of these cases have been scheduled for oral argument on January 13, 2009.

• Louis M. Ditta, Guardian of the Estate of Doris L. Conte v. Susan C. Conte and Joseph P. Conte, Jr., No. 07-1026, from the First Court of Appeals. (Briefs and COA opinion linked on DocketDB)

• City of Waco v. Debra Kirwan, Individually and as Representative of the Estate of Brad McGehee, No. 08-0121, from the Waco Court. (Briefs and COA opinion linked on DocketDB)

Following up on my earlier post, here are the summaries of Friday’s opinions.

The decisions involved piercing the corporate veil, what constitutes “personal knowledge” in a summary judgment affidavit, a special wrinkle in how to appeal from a trial court’s dismissal for failure to comply with special exceptions, whether corporations have a “residence” for purposes of mandatory venue statutes, whether you can circumvent random assignment of judges by intervening in an ongoing action, and more.

Click through to see the summaries.

[Read more →]

The Court issued decisions in seven cases with today’s order list. One of them was an argued case; the other six were Rule 59.1 decisions issued off the Court’s submarine docket. (( If the term “submarine docket” is unfamiliar to you, there is some explanation in this previous post. ))

Today’s opinions are available on this page. I’ll post some summaries of these cases later today. [Update: Today was busier than expected. I’ll get the summaries up this weekend.]

The Texas Supreme Court also granted the petition for review in State of Texas v. Central Expressway Sign Associates, No. 08-0061 (DocketDB), out of the Dallas Court of Appeals. That case has been set for argument on January 13, 2009.

In this week’s order list, the Court did not issue any opinions or grant new petitions for argument. (( The Court did formally grant the petition in Insurance Corp. of Hannover v. Polk, No. 08-0813, and remand to the court of appeals to effectuate the parties’ settlement agreement. ))

Among other orders, the Court also granted a motion to seal in In re Hon. Jan P. Patterson, No. 08-0858, the mandamus about the internal workings of the Third Court. That motion was filed by Justice Patterson, and the mandamus petition remains pending.

Next week, the Court has a scheduled private conference on Monday and a holiday (Veterans Day) on Tuesday, followed by two days of oral argument on Wednesday and Thursday.