Ingersoll-Rand Company, Petitioners v. Valero Energy Corporation, Respondents

Summary

The Texas Supreme Court held that Ingersoll‑Rand’s and Kellogg’s indemnity counterclaims were not compulsory counterclaims and therefore were not barred by res judicata, and that the four‑year statute of limitations did not bar those claims because the indemnity claims did not accrue until the summary‑judgment ruling in Valero I. The Court also affirmed that Valero’s later breach‑of‑contract claim was barred as claim‑splitting. The Court reversed the Court of Appeals and remanded for further proceedings.