Helena Chemical Company v. Phillip Bales, Derek Dieringer, Wilbert Dieringer, Michael Hoch, CMH Farms, Inc., MH Farms Services, Inc., Whit Braden, Donald Braden, and Streicher Farms, Inc.

Summary

The Supreme Court of Texas held that a substantial ground for difference of opinion under Texas Civil Practice and Remedies Code section 51.014(d)(1) exists when a trial-court ruling may be inconsistent with binding precedent. The Court granted Helena Chemical Company’s petition for review and directed the court of appeals to accept the permissive interlocutory appeal concerning the effect of Helena Chemical Co. v. Cox on the farmers’ expert testimony and causation evidence.

Holdings

1. Section 51.014(d)(1) is satisfied when there is a substantial ground for concluding that a trial-court ruling is at odds with binding precedent.
2. The trial court's recognition that its ruling might be contrary to binding Supreme Court precedent established a substantial ground for difference of opinion, and the court of appeals should have accepted the permissive interlocutory appeal.

Questions Presented

1. Whether Texas Civil Practice and Remedies Code section 51.014(d)(1) permits an interlocutory appeal when a trial court's ruling may be at odds with binding precedent.
2. Whether the court of appeals erred by refusing to accept the permissive interlocutory appeal on the ground that controlling precedent eliminated any substantial ground for difference of opinion.

Disposition

reversed_and_remanded