Weekly Digest
June 21 – June 27, 2025
2 opinions this week
In re Oncor Electric Delivery Co. LLC
Supreme Court of Texas
The Texas Supreme Court held that transmission and distribution utilities cannot be alleged to have created or maintained a nuisance as a matter of law. Intentional-nuisance claims against them must be dismissed with prejudice. The Court also held that the pleadings did not sufficiently state gross-negligence claims but allowed plaintiffs to replead those claims with guidance; mandamus relief was conditionally granted.
Litigation Takeaway
“Family-law practitioners must ensure precise pleading in cases involving third-party property damage. The ruling highlights the importance of precise allegations regarding legal duties and warns against reliance on conclusory statements. It emphasizes the strategic use of Rule 91a motions to dismiss legally insufficient claims early, affecting community-property valuations and liability allocations.”
Suday v. Suday
Supreme Court of Texas
The Texas Supreme Court held that an executor who is the sole beneficiary of an estate may represent the estate pro se, as she is effectively asserting only her personal rights rather than acting in a representative capacity. The decision affects family-law practice, particularly probate, estate administration, and post-decree property disputes intersecting with divorce or partition claims. The Court reversed the court of appeals’ dismissal for want of prosecution and remanded for consideration of the merits.
Litigation Takeaway
“Executors who are the sole beneficiaries can represent the estate pro se in Texas, impacting litigation strategies in probate and family law where the executor's interests align solely with their own. This eliminates an automatic procedural basis for dismissal when counsel withdraws.”