D. Priest & Van Commission v. Tex. Animal Health Commission
1989.TX.41643; 780 S.W.2D 874
Supreme Court Of Utah
This book is available for download with iBooks on your Mac or iOS device, and with iTunes on your computer. Books can be read with iBooks on your Mac or iOS device.
D. Priest and Van Zandt Commission Company (hereafter collectively "Priest") appeal from a permanent injunction entered by summary judgment, enjoining Priest from: 1) failing to maintain proper cattle ownership records for cattle sold through them; 2) refusing to allow Texas Animal Health Commission (hereafter "Commission") representatives to examine such records; and 3) failing to brand cattle exposed to brucellosis. In two points of error, Priest contends that the trial court erred in granting the Commissions motion for summary judgment because: 1) the summary judgment evidence did not entitle the Commission to judgment as a matter of law and did not establish that there were no genuine issues of material fact; and 2) the affidavits and attachments to the Commissions motion for summary judgment were inadequate as a matter of law to establish that no material issue of fact existed. We agree that the proof failed to establish that Priest failed to keep records as required by law. We conclude, however, that the other grounds for injunction were properly established. Thus, the trial courts judgment is affirmed in part and reversed and remanded in part.