5 Texas opinions name it 1 courts 1944–2019 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 |
|---|---|---|
EX PARTE Roberto Gonzalez DE LA CRUZ, Applicantgreen1 sentence2019See id. | 1 | 1 |
Bee County Cooperative Association v. Dominygreen1 sentence1974See Bee County Cooperative Association v. Dominy, 489 S.W.2d 418 (Tex.Civ.App., Corpus Christi, 1972, no writ). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Texas. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Behrens Drug Co. v. Hamilton & McCarty
green
2 sentences1955Under Behrens Drug Co. v. Hamilton, supra, even though all parties to a suit were proper parties and all causes of action therein were properly joined, the venue of such suit could not, as against a defendant claiming his privilege, be sustained in a county where none of the *113 defendants resided, unless as to _such defendant (without reference to any other defendant) some exception to the general rule of venue was applicable. 1944Under Behrens Drug Co. v. Hamilton, supra, even though all parties to a suit were proper parties and all causes of action therein were properly joined, the venue of such suit could not, as against a defendant claiming his privilege, be sustained in a county where none of the defendants resided, unless as to such defendant (without reference to any other defendant) some exception to the general rule of venue was applicable. | 2 | 1944–1955 |
Jackson v. State
green
1 sentence2016Jackson v. State, 992 S.W.2d 469 , 479–80 (Tex. Crim. | 1 | 2016–2016 |
Boyd v. San Antonio Nat. Bank
green
1 sentence1955Such is the law today, without reference to any changes in rules respecting the joinder of parties or causes of action, except as such law has been modified by the subsequently enacted Exception 29a.” Application of these rules was made in an earlier case, Boyd v. San Antonio National Bank, Tex.Civ.App., 171 S.W.2d 375, 376 , by the San Antonio Court. | 1 | 1955–1955 |
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.