You are viewing a free summary from Descrybe.ai. For citation checking, legal issue analysis, and other advanced tools, explore our Legal Research Toolkit — not free, but close.

CCC Group, Inc. v. Enduro Composites, Inc. and J.P. MacK Industries, LLC

Citation: Not availableDocket: 14-19-00204-CV

Court: Court of Appeals of Texas; August 31, 2021; Texas; State Appellate Court

Original Court Document: View Document

Narrative Opinion Summary

The appeal case involves CCC Group, Inc. as the appellant against Enduro Composites, Inc. and J.P. Mack Industries, LLC as appellees, originating from the 190th District Court of Harris County, Texas (Cause No. 2014-18092). The court issued a ruling on August 31, 2021, which affirmed certain aspects of the lower court's decision while reversing and rendering others. Justice Charles A. Spain filed a concurring opinion, agreeing with the judgment but limiting his concurrence to part II(A) of the opinion. He did not support the decision to publish the opinion as a non-memorandum opinion. The panel included Justices Jewell, Spain, and Wilson, with Justice Wilson authoring the majority opinion.

Legal Issues Addressed

Appellate Review of Lower Court Decisions

Application: The appellate court affirmed certain aspects of the lower court's decision and reversed and rendered others, demonstrating the court's role in reviewing and modifying lower court rulings.

Reasoning: The court issued a ruling on August 31, 2021, which affirmed certain aspects of the lower court's decision while reversing and rendering others.

Concurring Opinions in Appellate Decisions

Application: Justice Charles A. Spain filed a concurring opinion, indicating agreement with the judgment but limited to specific parts, showcasing the practice of concurring opinions in appellate courts.

Reasoning: Justice Charles A. Spain filed a concurring opinion, agreeing with the judgment but limiting his concurrence to part II(A) of the opinion.

Publication of Judicial Opinions

Application: Justice Spain did not support the decision to publish the opinion as a non-memorandum opinion, highlighting judicial discretion in the publication of opinions.

Reasoning: He did not support the decision to publish the opinion as a non-memorandum opinion.