Thank you for sharing!

Your article was successfully shared with the contacts you provided.
Click here for the full text of this decision FACTS:Annette Longtin, individually and in her representative capacity as a shareholder of Country One Stop Inc., a Texas corporation, appeals the no-evidence summary judgment granted in favor of Country One Stop Inc., Mel Schonhorst, Thomas Lydick, Teresa Davis and Brandon Lydick. HOLDING:Affirmed. Longtin contends that, because the trial court granted temporary injunctions in her favor before the no-evidence summary judgment motion was filed, the trial court necessarily would have been required to find some evidence existed in support of her claims, and, therefore, summary judgment was improperly granted. Longtin contends that the trial court erred in failing to take judicial notice of its own records and proceedings when Longtin requested, in her response to the summary judgment motion, that the trial court take judicial notice of the evidence offered at the temporary injunction hearings. Longtin argues specifically that the evidence was not subject to dispute, and she should not be required to go to the expense of transcribing and attaching the records of the temporary injunction hearings. The court begins with the second issue. Relying on Texas Rule of Evidence 201(d), Longtin argues that the trial court was required to take judicial notice of the entire temporary injunction proceeding. Rule 201(d) states that a trial court “shall take judicial notice if requested by a party and supplied with the necessary information.” Texas Rule of Evidence 201(d). Here, Longtin did not identify any particular adjudicative fact for the trial court to consider. Instead, she requested the entire temporary injunction proceeding to be judicially noticed. Because of the nature of Longtin’s request, the court cannot conclude that the trial court abused its discretion by not taking judicial notice of unidentified, discrete adjudicative facts that may have been present in the temporary injunction proceeding. The trial court did not err in failing to take judicial notice of the evidence and testimony offered at the temporary injunction hearings. Longtin argues that the mere granting of a temporary injunction raises a fact issue on the elements of her claims, making summary judgment improper. Longtin’s argument appears to be an extension of her second issue. The court notes that, during a hearing on a temporary injunction, the applicant is not required to prove that she will prevail at trial, but only that she is entitled to preserve the status quo pending trial on the merits because she has a probable right and a probable injury. This burden of proof is different from Longtin’s burden pursuant to Rule 166a(i). Merely presenting evidence in support of a successful request for a temporary injunction does not automatically raise a fact issue in opposition to a Rule 166a(i) no-evidence summary judgment motion, which is subsequently filed. Evidence adduced in a prior proceeding should not be presented to the trial court by a broad request for judicial notice. Rather, the necessary information must be supplied to the trial court for its consideration. The court rejects Longtin’s argument that since a hearing was held and evidence adduced resulting in the granting of a temporary injunction, the no-evidence motion for summary judgment is rebutted. OPINION:Lang, J.

Want to continue reading?
Become a Free ALM Digital Reader.

Benefits of a Digital Membership:

  • Free access to 3 articles* every 30 days
  • Access to the entire ALM network of websites
  • Unlimited access to the ALM suite of newsletters
  • Build custom alerts on any search topic of your choosing
  • Search by a wide range of topics

*May exclude premium content
Already have an account?


ALM Legal Publication Newsletters

Sign Up Today and Never Miss Another Story.

As part of your digital membership, you can sign up for an unlimited number of a wide range of complimentary newsletters. Visit your My Account page to make your selections. Get the timely legal news and critical analysis you cannot afford to miss. Tailored just for you. In your inbox. Every day.

Copyright © 2020 ALM Media Properties, LLC. All Rights Reserved.