SANDRA PARKER APPELLANT v. ROBERT GLASGOW JR AND GLASGOW TAYLOR ISHAM GLASGOW APPELLEES (2017)

CONCURRING MEMORANDUM OPINION 1

I concur. I write separately to emphasize that my concurrence with the majority's disposition sustaining Appellant Sandra E. Parker's first and second issues is based solely on the fact that the motion for summary judgment filed by Appellees Robert J. Glasgow, Jr. and Glasgow, Taylor, Isham & Glasgow, P.C. on Parker's legal malpractice claim filed against them was a traditional motion for summary judgment seeking judgment as a matter of law. The majority's holding does not preclude the filing of a no-evidence motion for summary judgment by Appellees. With this caveat, I respectfully concur.

FOOTNOTES

1.   See Tex. R. App. P. 47.4.

SUE WALKER JUSTICE