A.V.I. v. Kenneth and Claudia Heathington A.V.I. v. Kenneth and Claudia Heathington

A.V.I. v. Kenneth and Claudia Heathington

1992.TX.41522 ; 842 S.W.2D 712

    • USD 0.99
    • USD 0.99

Descripción editorial

Appellant, A.V.I., Inc. (AVI), appeals from a judgment finding it had engaged in deceptive acts or practices in its dealings with appellees, Kenneth and Claudia Heathington (the Heathingtons), and ordering it to pay the Heathingtons $31,470.55 in damages, attorneys fees and prejudgment interest. In four points of error, AVI contends the trial court erred by (1) submitting and rendering judgment upon Question 5b because the question submitted an improper measure of damages; (2) admitting the irrelevant testimony of two witnesses; (3) rendering judgment for the Heathingtons despite their failure to conclusively prove they had given AVI a required demand letter; and (4) awarding prejudgment interest on attorneys fees. In a single cross point of error, the Heathingtons contend the trial court erred in not granting a new trial on the issue of attorneys fees on appeal. We will overrule AVIs four points of error and sustain the Heathingtons cross point of error.

GÉNERO
Técnicos y profesionales
PUBLICADO
1992
28 de agosto
IDIOMA
EN
Inglés
EXTENSIÓN
15
Páginas
EDITORIAL
LawApp Publishers
VENDEDOR
Innodata Book Distribution Services Inc
TAMAÑO
66.8
KB

Más libros de Supreme Court Of Utah

Emerald Oil Co. v. State Tax Commission Emerald Oil Co. v. State Tax Commission
1954
Dillon Smith v. Utah Central Credit Union Dillon Smith v. Utah Central Credit Union
1986
Kirchgestner v. Denver & Rio Grande Kirchgestner v. Denver & Rio Grande
1951
Richard Rousay v. Board Review Industrial Richard Rousay v. Board Review Industrial
1987
Utah Power and Light Company v. Public Utah Power and Light Company v. Public
1985
State Utah v. Victor Lazcano Gardea State Utah v. Victor Lazcano Gardea
1985