The judgment finding that the subscribers' complaint stated a claim was reversed, and the case was remanded for further proceedings.

The court reversed the judgment and the matter was remitted for further proceedings.

The court of appeals reversed the judgment of the intermediate court, awarded summary judgment for defendant and dismissed plaintiffs' appeal because the court applied the business judgment doctrine and found no basis to question either the disinterested nature of defendant's committee or its methods of investigation.

The court reversed the judgment and remanded the cause to the trial court for a trial on the amount of damages plaintiff purchaser should have been awarded from defendant accounting firm for damages its actions caused in suit brought for faulty audit. The court also remanded the issue of the amount of attorney's fees awarded under the Deceptive Trade Practice Act, stating that plaintiff must prove they were reasonable...

The court reversed the judgment of the court of appeal, and remanded for further proceedings.

The court reversed in part and affirmed in part the judgment of the court of appeals, and remanded the surviving claims of plaintiffs, smoker's estate and survivors, against defendant tobacco company to the trial court for further proceedings. The court concluded that defendant had conclusively established the defense of common knowledge with regard to the general health risks of smoking, but not with regard to the...

The court affirmed the lower court's order because plaintiff's trade name had not acquired a secondary meaning nor was it a strong trade name susceptible to dilution.

The court affirmed the decision of the district court.

The chancery court's judgment denying the motions was reversed and the case was remanded for the chancery court's reconsideration of the motions.

The judgment was reversed and remanded with regard to the intentional infliction of serious emotional distress claim. The judgment was affirmed in all other respects.

The court affirmed the decision of the court of appeal.

The court reversed the lower court's decision. It granted the sellers' motion for summary judgment.

The court modified the order and remitted the case for a new trial.

Defendant's petition for rehearing was denied.

The conviction and sentence were affirmed.

The order dismissing the manufacturer's action was reversed.

The judgment of the district court was affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded for further proceedings.

In reversing dismissal of two class actions against defendant manufacturers of diethylstilbestrol (DES) the court adopted the theory of market share liability, holding that if defendants could not prove they did not make the DES at issue liability for damages would be apportioned based on their market share.

The court reversed because respondent lessees' contacts with Texas were continuing and systematic enough to permit the imposition of jurisdiction. The exercise of jurisdiction would not offend traditional notions of fair play and substantial justice, and litigation in a Texas court would not be excessively burdensome or inconvenient to him.

The court affirmed the dismissal of the employee's four contract claims.

The supreme court affirmed the trial court's grant of a preliminary injunction where defendant directors did not act in the shareholders' best interest in ending a corporate auction. This decision amounted to a breach of the business judgment rule.

The court reversed the appellate court's decision and remanded the cause to the trial court for entry of judgment in favor of defendant because plaintiff's termination from her work was not for reasons that were contrary to a clear mandate of public policy.

The judgment was modified by denying the bank's motion for summary judgment, and as so modified, affirmed.

The court reversed the lower court's order, granted the insurer's motion to dismiss the insured's second through fifth causes of action and the demand for attorney fees, and denied the insured's cross motion to dismiss the insurer's affirmative defenses.

The court reversed and remanded, with instructions to issue a peremptory writ mandating the trial court to reconsider its order overruling defendant shareholders' demurrer to plaintiff shipping company's claims related to the shareholders' agreement, which was governed by the law of Hong Kong.