Trent S. Griffin v. American Zurich Insurance Company

CourtCourt of Appeals of Texas
DecidedApril 21, 2021
Docket05-19-00630-CV
StatusPublished

This text of Trent S. Griffin v. American Zurich Insurance Company (Trent S. Griffin v. American Zurich Insurance Company) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Texas primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Trent S. Griffin v. American Zurich Insurance Company, (Tex. Ct. App. 2021).

Opinion

Order entered April 21, 2021

In The Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

No. 05-19-00630-CV

TRENT S. GRIFFIN, Appellant

V.

AMERICAN ZURICH INSURANCE COMPANY, Appellee

On Appeal from the 101st Judicial District Court Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. DC-13-05893

ORDER

Before the Court are appellant’s “Second Motion Requesting [this Court] to

Take Judicial Notice of Adjudicative Facts” and appellee’s response and motion to

strike the same. We may take judicial notice of adjudicative facts that are not

subject to reasonable dispute because they are (1) generally known within the trial

court’s territorial jurisdiction or (2) can be accurately and readily determined from

sources whose accuracy cannot reasonably be questioned. TEX. R. EVID. 201(b);

Hudson v. Markum, 931 S.W.2d 336, 337 n.1 (Tex. App.—Dallas 1996, no writ) (appellate court took judicial notice of funeral and death announcement in Dallas

Morning News); see In re Estate of Hemsley, 460 S.W.3d 629, 638–39 (Tex.

App.—El Paso 2014, pet. denied) (taking judicial notice that it was widely reported

on local, state, and national news that Hemsley was buried in El Paso on

November 21, 2012 at Fort Bliss National Cemetery).

The matters appellant seeks to have us take judicial notice of in his seventy-

seven page motion (including attachments) do not fall within either category, and

in any event, we need not consider such matters to decide the single issue

presented to us and decided in our memorandum opinion issued today.

Having considered the parties’ motions and related responses, we conclude

both parties’ motions should be, and are, DENIED as MOOT.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

/s/ KEN MOLBERG JUSTICE

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

Related

Hudson v. Markum
931 S.W.2d 336 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1996)
in the Matter of the Estate of Sherman Alexander Hemsley
460 S.W.3d 629 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 2014)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Trent S. Griffin v. American Zurich Insurance Company, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/trent-s-griffin-v-american-zurich-insurance-company-texapp-2021.