Court Opinion

ID: 9863117
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-09-25 03:05:59.194924+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T11:47:14.673434
License: Public Domain

ROBERTSON, Justice,
concurring.
I concur. I agree with the determination by the court that the privilege claimed by the petitioners has been waived. For that reason it is not necessary, nor constitutionally permissible, to determine whether there would have been a privilege on each document within each envelope. This court held in United Services Life Insurance Co. v. Delaney, 396 S.W.2d 855, 861 (Tex.1965): “... the constitutional provisions relating to this Court and the Court of Civil Appeals do not authorize said courts to render advisory opinions.” Although I do not necessarily approve of the court of appeals’ construction of the statutory privilege, that portion of this court’s opinion, not being dispositive of the case, can only be advisory. See Central Surety & Insurance Corp. v. Anderson, 445 S.W.2d 514 (Tex.1969); Firemen’s Ins. Co. of Newark, New Jersey v. Burch, 442 S.W.2d 331 (Tex.1968).
CAMPBELL and RAY, JJ., join in this concurring opinion.