American Chrome & Chemicals, Inc. v. Benavides

Texas Supreme Court

American Chrome & Chemicals, Inc. v. Benavides

907 S.W.2d 516, 38 Tex. Sup. Ct. J. 990, 1995 Tex. LEXIS 114, 1995 WL 385570

CourtTexas Supreme Court

DecidedJune 29, 1995

Docket95-0203

StatusPublished

Cited by10 cases

This text of 907 S.W.2d 516 (American Chrome & Chemicals, Inc. v. Benavides) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Texas Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

American Chrome & Chemicals, Inc. v. Benavides, 907 S.W.2d 516, 38 Tex. Sup. Ct. J. 990, 1995 Tex. LEXIS 114, 1995 WL 385570 (Tex. 1995).

Pincite

Opinion

DENIAL OF APPLICATION FOR WRIT OF ERROR

PER CURIAM.

Roger Benavides was killed when he fell through the corroded top of a vat of sulfuric acid while working at night. Linda Bena-vides, individually and as next friend of her minor children David Roger Benavides and Paul Anthony Benavides and as heir and personal representative of the estate of her deceased husband (Mrs. Benavides), sued his employer, American Chrome and Chemical (ACC), for gross negligence. During jury selection, ACC’s attorney used five of his six peremptory strikes against Hispanic panelists. Mrs. Benavides moved for a hearing to determine if the strikes were racially motivated. The trial court found no purposeful discrimination in ACC’s strikes. After trial, *517 the trial court rendered judgment that Mrs. Benavides take nothing. The court of appeals reversed and remanded, finding that ACC’s attorney had improperly discriminated on the basis of race in using a peremptory strike against one of the jurors, Margarita Hinojosa. 893 S.W.2d 624.

In reaching this conclusion, the court of appeals relied on Powers v. Palacios, 813 S.W.2d 489 (Tex.1991). However, the court suggested that “we and the Texas Supreme Court have gone a step further than some jurisdictions.” We disagree with this language. In Powers, this court followed Edmonson v. Leesville Concrete Co., Inc., 500 U.S. 614, 111 S.Ct. 2077, 114 L.Ed.2d 660 (1991), in holding that equal protection is denied when a private litigant in a civil ease uses a peremptory challenge to exclude a juror on account of race. Powers, 813 S.W.2d at 491. See also Batson v. Kentucky, 476 U.S. 79, 93, 106 S.Ct. 1712, 1721, 90 L.Ed.2d 69 (1986); Hernandez v. New York, 500 U.S. 352, 359, 111 S.Ct. 1859, 1866, 114 L.Ed.2d 395 (1991); Purkett v. Elem, — U.S. -, -, 115 S.Ct. 1769, 1770, 131 L.Ed.2d 834 (1995).

The application for writ of error is denied.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

DENIAL OF APPLICATION FOR WRIT OF ERROR

PER CURIAM.

Roger Benavides was killed when he fell through the corroded top of a vat of sulfuric acid while working at night. Linda Bena-vides, individually and as next friend of her minor children David Roger Benavides and Paul Anthony Benavides and as heir and personal representative of the estate of her deceased husband (Mrs. Benavides), sued his employer, American Chrome and Chemical (ACC), for gross negligence. During jury selection, ACC’s attorney used five of his six peremptory strikes against Hispanic panelists. Mrs. Benavides moved for a hearing to determine if the strikes were racially motivated. The trial court found no purposeful discrimination in ACC’s strikes. After trial, *517 the trial court rendered judgment that Mrs. Benavides take nothing. The court of appeals reversed and remanded, finding that ACC’s attorney had improperly discriminated on the basis of race in using a peremptory strike against one of the jurors, Margarita Hinojosa. 893 S.W.2d 624.

In reaching this conclusion, the court of appeals relied on Powers v. Palacios, 813 S.W.2d 489 (Tex.1991). However, the court suggested that “we and the Texas Supreme Court have gone a step further than some jurisdictions.” We disagree with this language. In Powers, this court followed Edmonson v. Leesville Concrete Co., Inc., 500 U.S. 614, 111 S.Ct. 2077, 114 L.Ed.2d 660 (1991), in holding that equal protection is denied when a private litigant in a civil ease uses a peremptory challenge to exclude a juror on account of race. Powers, 813 S.W.2d at 491. See also Batson v. Kentucky, 476 U.S. 79, 93, 106 S.Ct. 1712, 1721, 90 L.Ed.2d 69 (1986); Hernandez v. New York, 500 U.S. 352, 359, 111 S.Ct. 1859, 1866, 114 L.Ed.2d 395 (1991); Purkett v. Elem, — U.S. -, -, 115 S.Ct. 1769, 1770, 131 L.Ed.2d 834 (1995).

The application for writ of error is denied.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

907 S.W.2d 516, 38 Tex. Sup. Ct. J. 990, 1995 Tex. LEXIS 114, 1995 WL 385570, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/american-chrome-chemicals-inc-v-benavides-tex-1995.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack