OSCAR ORTIZ v. STATE FARM LLOYDS; from Bexar County; 4th Court of Appeals District (04-17-00252-CV, 568 SW3d 156, 11-08-17) (Concurring and Dissenting)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF TEXAS 444444444444 NO. 17-1048 444444444444 OSCAR ORTIZ, PETITIONER, v. STATE FARM LLOYDS, RESPONDENT 4444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444 ON PETITION FOR REVIEW FROM THE COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS 4444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444 CHIEF JUSTICE HECHT, joined by JUSTICE BROWN and JUSTICE BLACKLOCK, concurring in part and dissenting in part. I join Parts I, II, III-A, III-B, and III-C of the Court’s opinion. For the reasons I explain today in dissent from the Court’s opinion in Barbara Technologies Corp. v. State Farm Lloyds,1 I dissent from Part III-D and from the Court’s judgment insofar as it does not affirm the court of appeals’ judgment in full. Nathan L. Hecht Chief Justice Opinion delivered: June 28, 2019 1 ___ S.W.3d ___ (Tex. 2019).
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
