Sawyer v. Millard

849 S.W.2d 808, 36 Tex. Sup. Ct. J. 680, 1993 Tex. LEXIS 25, 1993 WL 82676
Texas Supreme Court·Decided March 24, 1993·No. No. D-3322·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

After Kelly Sawyer failed timely to designate expert witnesses under an order granting a motion to compel responses to interrogatories, the trial court precluded Sawyer from calling or designating any experts. Sawyer subsequently took a voluntary nonsuit.

When Sawyer filed the present action alleging substantially the same claims, the defendants filed a motion to enforce the sanction from the previous suit. On October 19, 1992, the trial court granted the motion, with the effect of precluding Sawyer from designating or calling expert witnesses. For the reasons set forth today in Aetna Casualty & Surety Co. v. Specia, 849 S.W.2d 805 (Tex.1993, orig. proceeding), we hold that the sanction of striking witnesses did not survive the nonsuit.

Without hearing oral argument, a majority of this court conditionally grants the petition for mandamus. Tex.R.App.P. 170. The writ will issue only if the trial judge refuses to vacate his order of October 19, 1992.

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

Sawyer v. Millard, 849 S.W.2d 808, 36 Tex. Sup. Ct. J. 680, 1993 Tex. LEXIS 25, 1993 WL 82676 (Tex. 1993).

849 S.W.2d 808 (Sawyer v. Millard) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Alvarado v. Hyundai Motor Co.
885 S.W.2d 167 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1994)