Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 3 of 3
Full-Text Articles in Law
Mind The Gap: Expansion Of Texas Governmental Immunity Between Takings And Tort., Jadd F. Masso
Mind The Gap: Expansion Of Texas Governmental Immunity Between Takings And Tort., Jadd F. Masso
St. Mary's Law Journal
In Jennings v. City of Dallas, the city’s wastewater collection division was dispatched to unstop a clogged sewer main but instead caused sewage to spew into the Jennings’ home with dramatic force, causing extensive damage. The Jennings subsequently filed suit against the city, alleging its actions constituted an unconstitutional taking, damaging, or destruction of their property for public use without adequate compensation in violation of Article I, § 17 of the Texas Constitution. The issue presented from the case was whether an individual citizen should be liable for such losses when the damage—as an incident to governmental action—in effect benefits …
Backdoor Non-Competes In Texas: Trade Secrets., Ted Lee, Leila Ben Debba
Backdoor Non-Competes In Texas: Trade Secrets., Ted Lee, Leila Ben Debba
St. Mary's Law Journal
The unpredictability of court decisions on covenants not to compete is an attorney’s nightmare in Texas. The Texas Supreme Court's decision in Light v. Centel Cellular (Light II), holding that trade secrets may serve as independent consideration for a valid covenant not to compete, has only exacerbated the situation. Currently, attorneys and clients alike are at the mercy of judicial unpredictability. Texas courts have managed to muddle their own underlying public policy on covenants not to compete with trade secrets. During the years preceding Light II, Texas courts consistently struck a balance between the legitimate rights of employers to protect …
Questionable Summary Judgments, Appearances Of Judicial Bias, And Insurance Defense In Texas Declaratory-Judgment Trials: A Proposal And Arguments For Revising Texas Rules Of Civil Procedure 166a(A), 166a(B), And 166a(L)., Willy E. Rice
St. Mary's Law Journal
Economic necessity, expanding dockets, and judicial bias and unfairness are reasons for removing summary judgement practice from declaratory judgment trials in Texas. The Texas Supreme Court adopted the summary judgment rule primarily to prevent juries from considering arguably groundless causes, to reduce costs, and to increase "the efficient administration of justice." The Texas Supreme Court could prevent summary judgment practice in declaratory judgment cases. Texas's judges have the power to decide questions of fact and law when considering whether to award declaratory relief, negating the perceived need to entertain motions for summary relief. Trial judges must employ those doctrines to …