Court Opinion

ID: 9766248
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-29 04:37:57.711571+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:30:20.681618
License: Public Domain

NYE, Justice
(concurring).
Appellant’s motion raises various questions relative to the quality of the summary judgment evidence. Among appellant’s contentions is the argument that the opinions and conclusions contained in the affidavits of certain witnesses do not have probative weight, and that we have treated the motion for summary judgment as a general demurrer requiring the appellant to establish all of the elements of its cause of action, even when the element of probable cause was not at issue.
In an action on a motion for summary judgment where the motion is supported by affidavits sufficient on their face to establish facts which if proven at the trial would entitle the movant to an instructed verdict, the judgment sought should be rendered. Gulf, Colorado & Santa Fe Railway Co. v. McBride, 159 Tex. 442, 322 S.W.2d 492 (1958); Usher v. Glass, Sorenson & McDavid Insurance Co., 409 S.W.2d 880 (Tex.Civ.App. — Corpus Christi, 1966, ref. n. r. e.).
In reviewing the summary judgment proof, I believe that it establishes as a matter of law that there is no genuine issue of fact to at least one of the essential elements of appellant’s cause of action. Rule 166-A, T.R.C.P.; Gibbs v. General Motors Corporation, 450 S.W.2d 827 (Tex.Sup. 1970).
The motion for rehearing should be overruled.