Quaker Petroleum Chemicals Co. v. Waldrop

75 S.W.3d 549 (2002)

From our private database of 47,000+ case briefs, written and edited by humans—never with AI.

Quaker Petroleum Chemicals Co. v. Waldrop

Texas Court of Appeals
75 S.W.3d 549 (2002)

Facts

Dave Edmonds stored chemicals in a warehouse on behalf of Quaker Petroleum Chemicals Company (Quaker) (defendant). Linda Waldrop and Louis Tuttle (plaintiffs) lived near the warehouse. Jane McCord, her son Dillon, and her husband (plaintiffs) also lived nearby. One day, Waldrop noticed the warehouse had a sharp smell inside and later went to the emergency room with respiratory issues. Quaker discovered that a chemical barrel had leaked. Quaker sent Rick Talley to visit the warehouse’s neighbors. Talley told McCord and Waldrop that if anyone even thought about suing Quaker over the leak, Quaker would countersue. Ultimately, Quaker paid Waldrop’s medical bills in exchange for her promising not to sue over the leak. Edmonds, McCord’s family, and Waldrop all attended the same church. Over the next few months, Edmonds repeatedly made comments at church events within McCord’s hearing, implying McCord and Waldrop were “sue-happy” and causing problems. McCord’s son Dillon then became seriously ill, and McCord’s brother-in-law died. Edmonds told McCord that if bad things had happened to her family, it was God punishing them for not living right. These comments deeply upset McCord and Waldrop, ultimately prompting them to change churches to avoid Edmonds. Two years after the leak, McCord’s family, Waldrop, Tuttle, and two others sued Quaker for negligence regarding the leak. The complaint was later amended to add claims for the tort of intentional infliction of emotional distress (IIED). These IIED claims were based on allegations that (1) Talley and Edmonds were Quaker’s representatives and had made statements that caused significant emotional distress to McCord, Waldrop, and the other plaintiffs and (2) Quaker’s chemical leak had caused them all emotional distress. The case went to trial. A jury found Quaker was liable for IIED and awarded damages to Waldrop, McCord, and McCord’s son Dillon. Quaker asked the trial court to dismiss the IIED claims despite the jury’s verdict. The trial court denied the request. Quaker appealed to the Texas Court of Appeals.

Rule of Law

Issue

Holding and Reasoning (Green, J.)

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 899,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.

  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students.

Here's why 899,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 47,000 briefs, keyed to 994 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
  • The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
  • Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
  • Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership
Here's why 899,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
  • Reliable - written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students
  • The right length and amount of information - includes the facts, issue, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents
  • Access in your class - works on your mobile and tablet
  • 47,000 briefs - keyed to 994 casebooks
  • Uniform format for every case brief
  • Written in plain English - not in legalese and not just repeating the court's language
  • Massive library of related video lessons - and practice questions
  • Top-notch customer support

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership