Texas Supreme Court· 7/21/1995

SmithKline Beecham Corp. v. Doe

Citations

903 S.W.2d 347
38 Tex. Sup. Ct. J. 1058
10 I.E.R. Cas. (BNA) 1487
1995 Tex. LEXIS 131
1995 WL 434475

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

holding that, even under a liberal construction, the pleading did not allege misrepresentation
holding that drug testing company did not create dangerous situation by failing to warn person that ingesting substance would trigger positive drug test
holding that section 551 did not apply because “SmithKline made no representations to Doe whatever”
holding that defendant was not required to negate element of unpleaded negligent misrepresentation claim even where plaintiff 8 pleaded other negligence theories
holding that defendant “need not . . . show that the plaintiff cannot succeed on any theory conceivable in order to obtain summary judgment; he is only ‘required to meet the plaintiff’s case as pleaded.’” (emphasis in original
holding that defendant \need not . . . show that the plaintiff cannot succeed on any theory conceivable in order to obtain summary judgment; he is only 'required to meet the plaintiff's case as pleaded.'\ (emphasis in original

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Hecht, Gammage, Phillips, Gonzalez, Cornyn, Enoch, Owen, Hightower, Spector

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

233 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Cites

45 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.