Morris v. Hoerster

370 S.W.2d 451
Texas Supreme Court·Decided July 31, 1963·No. A-9664, A-9665·Published·Cited by 7 cases

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

We agree with the result reached by the Court of Civil Appeals. 368 S.W.2d 639. However, we do not agree with the Court of Civil Appeals that petitioner’s recourse in denial of a bill of discovery brought in conjunction with pending litigation, though brought as an independent action, is only by way of mandamus in the Supreme Court. The reasoning in Crane v. Tunks, 160 Tex. 182, 328 S.W.2d 434, does not necessarily apply where a bill of discovery has been denied.

The applications for writ of error are refused, n. r. e. Rule 483, Texas Rules of Civil Procedure.

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

Morris v. Hoerster, 370 S.W.2d 451 (Tex. 1963).

370 S.W.2d 451 (Morris v. Hoerster) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Pelt v. State Board of Insurance
802 S.W.2d 822 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1991)
Hancock v. State
800 S.W.2d 683 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1990)
Dickens v. Court of Appeals for the Second Supreme Judicial District of Texas
727 S.W.2d 542 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1987)
Morris v. Smiley
378 S.W.2d 149 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1964)
Morris v. Hoerster
377 S.W.2d 841 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1964)