Court Opinion

ID: 2886378
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2015-09-07 19:15:44.193585+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T12:43:46.690565
License: Public Domain

NO. 07-02-0015-CV

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE SEVENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

AT AMARILLO

PANEL E

DECEMBER 2, 2002

______________________________

BETTY FROST MCALEER, APPELLANT

V.

EASTMAN KODAK COMPANY AND

EASTMAN CHEMICAL COMPANY, APPELLEES

_________________________________

FROM THE 359
TH
 DISTRICT COURT OF MONTGOMERY COUNTY;

NO. 97-12-04730-CV; HONORABLE JIM KEESHAN, JUDGE

_______________________________

Before QUINN and REAVIS, JJ., and BOYD, SJ.
(footnote: 1) 

Concurring Opinion

I concur in the result reached by the majority for the following reason.  Via the “Amendment to Right of Way Agreement” executed on April 20, 1988, Texas Eastman Company was designated the “grantee” or recipient of the easements or rights of way encompassed in both the original grant dated September 5, 1961, and the April 20, 1988 amendment.  Furthermore, the record illustrates that either Texas Eastman Company has become a part of Eastman Chemical Company or that its assets were obtained by Eastman Chemical.  So, to the extent that the easements or rights of way were granted to Texas Eastman and the latter is now part of Eastman Chemical or its assets are owned by Eastman Chemical, there was a merger as defined by the parties  in the September 5, 1961 conveyance. 

Brian Quinn

   Justice

Do not publish.

FOOTNOTES
1:John T. Boyd, Chief Justice (Ret.), Seventh Court of Appeals, sitting by assignment.  Tex. Gov’t Code Ann. § 75.002(a)(1) (Vernon Supp. 2002).