CompFox AI Summary
Justice SUE WALKER dissents from the majority's holding that trial counsel failed to preserve error during closing argument. The majority asserted an objection was required when the trial court ruled that the jury should disregard workers' compensation testimony. Justice Walker argues that the majority mischaracterizes the trial court's ruling as an improper comment, rendering their cited case law inapplicable. She emphasizes that rules of appellate procedure, specifically Tex.R.App. P. 33.1(c), expressly state that no formal exception to a trial court ruling is needed to preserve a complaint for appeal. Therefore, Justice Walker believes the merits of the appellant Smith's complaints regarding the trial court's ruling should be addressed.
Smith v. Henson is a workers' compensation case decided in Court of Appeals of Texas. This case addresses legal issues related to compensation claims, benefits, and court rulings.
It is commonly referenced in legal research involving workers' compensation laws in Court of Appeals of Texas.
Full Decision Text1 Pages
Justice SUE WALKER dissents from the majority's holding that trial counsel failed to preserve error during closing argument. The majority asserted an objection was required when the trial court ruled that the jury should disregard workers' compensation testimony. Justice Walker argues that the majority mischaracterizes the trial court's ruling as an improper comment, rendering their cited case law inapplicable. She emphasizes that rules of appellate procedure, specifically Tex.R.App. P. 33.1(c), expressly state that no formal exception to a trial court ruling is needed to preserve a complaint for appeal. Therefore, Justice Walker believes the merits of the appellant Smith's complaints regarding the trial court's ruling should be addressed.
Read the full decision
Join + legal professionals. Create a free account to access the complete text of this decision and search our entire database.