Gunn Infiniti, Inc., Petitioner v. Donald O’byrne, Respondent

Summary

The Texas Supreme Court reversed the Court of Appeals, holding that Gunn Infiniti's settlement offers were not unconditional mitigation offers and therefore did not warrant a jury question on mitigation, and that the jury's award of mental anguish damages was unsupported; the Court reduced the DTPA additional damages to three times the benefit‑of‑the‑bargain award and remanded for further proceedings. Justice Baker dissented, arguing that the offers could support a mitigation question.