Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
5 Texas opinions name it 1 courts 2011–2019 0 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Texas courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
Boulet v. Stategreen1 sentence2019Boulet v. State, 189 S.W.3d 833, 838 (Tex. App.−Houston [1st Dist.] 2006, no pet.). | 1 | 1 |
Carle v. Carlegreen2 sentences2012See Carle v. Carle, 149 Tex. 469, 472 , 234 S.W.2d 1002, 1004 (1950) (explaining that a party who accepts the benefits of a judgment is estopped from appealing it); Waite v. Waite, 150 S.W.3d 797, 803 (Tex.App.-Houston [14th Dist.] 2004, pet. denied) (same). 2012See Carle v. Carle, 149 Tex. 469, 472 , 234 S.W.2d 1002, 1004 (1950) (explaining that a party who accepts the benefits of a judgment is estopped from appealing it); Waite v. Waite, 150 S.W.3d 797, 803 (Tex.App.-Houston [14th Dist.] 2004, pet. denied) (same). | 1 | 1 |
Waite v. Waitegreen2 sentences2012See Carle v. Carle, 149 Tex. 469, 472 , 234 S.W.2d 1002, 1004 (1950) (explaining that a party who accepts the benefits of a judgment is estopped from appealing it); Waite v. Waite, 150 S.W.3d 797, 803 (Tex.App.-Houston [14th Dist.] 2004, pet. denied) (same). 2012See Carle v. Carle, 149 Tex. 469, 472 , 234 S.W.2d 1002, 1004 (1950) (explaining that a party who accepts the benefits of a judgment is estopped from appealing it); Waite v. Waite, 150 S.W.3d 797, 803 (Tex.App.-Houston [14th Dist.] 2004, pet. denied) (same). | 1 | 1 |
Furst v. Smithgreen1 sentence2011See Furst v. Smith , 176 S.W.3d 864, 868 (Tex. App. — Houston [1st Dist.] 2005, no pet.). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Texas. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
G & H TOWING CO. v. Magee
green
2 sentences2019G & H Towing, Co., 347 S.W.3d at 297-98 . 2018G & H Towing, Co., 347 S.W.3d at 297-98 . | 2 | 2018–2019 |
In Re JFC
green
1 sentence2015FAM.CODE ANN. § 101.007 ( West 2008 ); In re J.F.C., 96 S.W.3d 256 , 264 Deborah also argues that Bob has accepted the (Tex.2002). benefits of the judgment by retaining one-half of the automatic annual payments that he began receiving at age We will not disturb the property division on appeal 65 under the Cash Deferral Program. | 1 | 2015–2015 |
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.