Natalie K. Halepeska, Petitioners v. Callihan Interests, Inc., Respondent

Summary

The Texas Supreme Court reversed the Court of Civil Appeals and remanded the case, holding that the appellate court erred in treating the "should have known" and "should have appreciated" issues as proper bases for judgment under the "no duty" and volenti doctrines. The majority also found no error in the trial court's refusal to submit issues on who opened the valves, as the record lacked sufficient evidence.