Lynch v. Kamps

Texas Supreme Court

Lynch v. Kamps

823 S.W.2d 232, 35 Tex. Sup. Ct. J. 456, 1992 Tex. LEXIS 10, 1992 WL 24186

Texas Supreme Court·Decided February 12, 1992·No. No. D-1818·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

After settling a lawsuit brought against him and his employer, James M. Lynch appealed discovery sanctions imposed against him in the course of the lawsuit of $1000.00. The court of appeals dismissed Lynch’s appeal in reliance on Schein v. American Restaurant Group, Inc., 794 S.W.2d 78 (Tex.App. — Fort Worth 1990, writ denied), a case we later disapproved in Felderhoffv. Knauf, 819 S.W.2d 110 (Tex.1991). In denying petitioner’s application for writ of error, we should not be understood as approving or disapproving of the court of appeals’ analysis of the dispositive issue in this case.

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

PER CURIAM.

After settling a lawsuit brought against him and his employer, James M. Lynch appealed discovery sanctions imposed against him in the course of the lawsuit of $1000.00. The court of appeals dismissed Lynch’s appeal in reliance on Schein v. American Restaurant Group, Inc., 794 S.W.2d 78 (Tex.App. — Fort Worth 1990, writ denied), a case we later disapproved in Felderhoffv. Knauf, 819 S.W.2d 110 (Tex.1991). In denying petitioner’s application for writ of error, we should not be understood as approving or disapproving of the court of appeals’ analysis of the dispositive issue in this case.

Lynch v. Kamps, 823 S.W.2d 232, 35 Tex. Sup. Ct. J. 456, 1992 Tex. LEXIS 10, 1992 WL 24186 (Tex. 1992).

Pincite

823 S.W.2d 232 (Lynch v. Kamps) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related