Schein v. American Restaurant Group, Inc.

794 S.W.2d 78, 1990 WL 130245
Court of Appeals of Texas·Decided July 10, 1990·No. 2-89-237-CV·Published·Cited by 5 cases

Opinion

OPINION

FARRIS, Justice.

Clifford Schein d/b/a J & B Cash Express (Cash Express) sued American Restaurant Group, Inc. (American) alleging holder in due course status on a check issued to one of American’s former employees. After the trial court sanctioned Cash Express for discovery abuse, Cash Express nonsuited its case, and now appeals the sanction order.

We hold that a plaintiff who has taken a non-suit cannot complain on appeal of any sanctions granted by the trial court before the non-suit. See Cornish v. Houston Terminal Land Co., 257 S.W. 575, 578 (Tex.Civ.App.—Galveston 1923, no writ); Levinski v. Williamson, 15 Tex.Civ.App. 67, 38 S.W. 376 (1896, no writ); TEX.R. CIV.P. 162.

Accordingly, we hold that Cash Express is not entitled to be heard in this court upon the points of error it urges concerning the sanction order, and we dismiss this appeal.

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

Schein v. American Restaurant Group, Inc., 794 S.W.2d 78, 1990 WL 130245 (Tex. Ct. App. 1990).

794 S.W.2d 78 (Schein v. American Restaurant Group, Inc.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Schein v. American Restaurant Group, Inc.
852 S.W.2d 496 (Texas Supreme Court, 1993)
Schein v. American Restaurant Group, Inc.
828 S.W.2d 307 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1992)
Lynch v. Kamps
823 S.W.2d 232 (Texas Supreme Court, 1992)
Felderhoff v. Knauf
819 S.W.2d 110 (Texas Supreme Court, 1991)
Lynch v. Kamps
816 S.W.2d 835 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1991)