Fantastic Homes, Inc. v. Combs

Texas Supreme Court

Fantastic Homes, Inc. v. Combs

596 S.W.2d 502

CourtTexas Supreme Court

DecidedOctober 17, 1979

DocketB-8761

StatusPublished

Cited by50 cases

This text of 596 S.W.2d 502 (Fantastic Homes, Inc. v. Combs) 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

Fantastic Homes, Inc. v. Combs, 596 S.W.2d 502 (Tex. 1979).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The trial court granted a take-nothing summary judgment against petitioners in their suit to recover damages from respondent under the Deceptive Trade Practices Act, section 17.41, et seq., Tex.Bus. & Com. Code Ann. The court of civil appeals reversed this judgment and remanded the cause to the trial court for further proceedings. 584 S.W.2d 340.

We agree with the holding of the court of civil appeals that a non-movant needs no answer or response to a motion for summary judgment in order to urge on appeal that the movant’s proof was insufficient to establish as a matter of law the specific grounds relied on by the movant. City of Houston v. Clear Creek Basin Authority, - S.W.2d -, 23 Tex.Sup.Ct.J. 7 (Oct. 6, 1979).

The question as to whether intent to deceive is required. to establish a cause of action under sections 17.46(a) and 17.-50(a)(3) of the Deceptive Trade Practices Act was not properly brought before this Court. We, therefore, reserve judgment as to the correctness of that portion of the court of civil appeals’ opinion. The petitioner’s application for writ of error is Refused, No Reversible Error.

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

PER CURIAM.

The trial court granted a take-nothing summary judgment against petitioners in their suit to recover damages from respondent under the Deceptive Trade Practices Act, section 17.41, et seq., Tex.Bus. & Com. Code Ann. The court of civil appeals reversed this judgment and remanded the cause to the trial court for further proceedings. 584 S.W.2d 340.

We agree with the holding of the court of civil appeals that a non-movant needs no answer or response to a motion for summary judgment in order to urge on appeal that the movant’s proof was insufficient to establish as a matter of law the specific grounds relied on by the movant. City of Houston v. Clear Creek Basin Authority, - S.W.2d -, 23 Tex.Sup.Ct.J. 7 (Oct. 6, 1979).

The question as to whether intent to deceive is required. to establish a cause of action under sections 17.46(a) and 17.-50(a)(3) of the Deceptive Trade Practices Act was not properly brought before this Court. We, therefore, reserve judgment as to the correctness of that portion of the court of civil appeals’ opinion. The petitioner’s application for writ of error is Refused, No Reversible Error.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

596 S.W.2d 502, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/fantastic-homes-inc-v-combs-tex-1979.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack