From our private database of 37,500+ case briefs...
Kao Holdings, L.P. v. Young
Texas Supreme Court
261 S.W.3d 60 (2008)
Facts
Annie Young (plaintiff) sued Kao Holdings, L.P. (defendant), a Texas limited partnership, for damages sustained when she fell in the laundry room and injured her hip in the Sebring Apartments, which were owned by Kao Holdings. Young’s complaint only listed Kao Holdings, but she served the complaint on Kao Holdings by personally serving the general partner, William Kao (defendant). Kao Holdings did not answer. Young filed for a motion for default judgment, stating that Kao was personally served and requesting relief as provided in her complaint. After a hearing, the court entered judgment against Kao Holdings and Kao for $2.5 million. Kao Holdings appealed. The court of appeals affirmed the liability portion of the judgment, finding that judgment against Kao individually was proper because he was the general partner for Kao Holdings and was personally served with the complaint. The court of appeals reversed the damages, holding the award unliquidated because Young had not provided evidence in support of the damages, and remanded the case for further proceedings. Kao appealed to the Texas Supreme Court, arguing that the judgment against him personally was improper because he was not a named defendant and was not served as a party.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Hecht, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 631,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 37,500 briefs, keyed to 984 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.