Narrative Opinion Summary
The writ of certiorari has been quashed due to its improvident grant. In doing so, the Court clarifies that this action does not endorse the language, rationale, or legal conclusions presented in the opinion of the Court of Civil Appeals. The decision is supported by Chief Justice Hooper and Justices Maddox, Cook, Lyons, Brown, Johnstone, and England. Justice See dissents.
Legal Issues Addressed
Judicial Consensus and Dissentsubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The decision to quash the writ was supported by a majority of the justices, with Justice See dissenting from the majority opinion.
Reasoning: The decision is supported by Chief Justice Hooper and Justices Maddox, Cook, Lyons, Brown, Johnstone, and England. Justice See dissents.
Non-Endorsement of Lower Court's Opinionsubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The court's action of quashing the writ does not imply agreement with the lower court's opinion in terms of its language, rationale, or legal conclusions.
Reasoning: In doing so, the Court clarifies that this action does not endorse the language, rationale, or legal conclusions presented in the opinion of the Court of Civil Appeals.
Quashing of Writ of Certiorarisubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The writ of certiorari was quashed because it was deemed improvidently granted, meaning the higher court determined that reviewing the case was a mistake.
Reasoning: The writ of certiorari has been quashed due to its improvident grant.