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 3 courts 1989–2017 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 |
|---|---|---|
Arthur Andersen & Co. v. Perry Equipment Corp.green1 sentence2017See Arthur Andersen, 945 S.W.2d at 817 (“Because the charge.failed to instruct the jury on the proper measure of direct damages, the submission was reversible error.”). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Texas. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Ex Parte Moussazadeh
green
1 sentence2016If it applied the correct law, the Court would have to deny Dean’s claim because she fails to prove, by a preponderance of the evidence, that her plea was induced by a misunderstanding of the applicable parole law that formed an essential element of the plea agreement.33 FILED: November 23, 2016 DO NOT PUBLISH 31 Moussazadeh II, 64 S.W.3d at 412 . 32 See Moussazadeh III, 361 S.W.3d at 690 . 33 See Moussazadeh II, 64 S.W.3d at 413 . | 1 | 2016–2016 |
Ex Parte Moussazadeh
green
2 sentences2016If it applied the correct law, the Court would have to deny Dean’s claim because she fails to prove, by a preponderance of the evidence, that her plea was induced by a misunderstanding of the applicable parole law that formed an essential element of the plea agreement.33 FILED: November 23, 2016 DO NOT PUBLISH 31 Moussazadeh II, 64 S.W.3d at 412 . 32 See Moussazadeh III, 361 S.W.3d at 690 . 33 See Moussazadeh II, 64 S.W.3d at 413 . 2016If it applied the correct law, the Court would have to deny Dean’s claim because she fails to prove, by a preponderance of the evidence, that her plea was induced by a misunderstanding of the applicable parole law that formed an essential element of the plea agreement.33 FILED: November 23, 2016 DO NOT PUBLISH 31 Moussazadeh II, 64 S.W.3d at 412 . 32 See Moussazadeh III, 361 S.W.3d at 690 . 33 See Moussazadeh II, 64 S.W.3d at 413 . | 1 | 2016–2016 |
in Re Estate of William H. McNutt
green
1 sentence2015Sherry’s 14 theory of the case fell right in line with the trial court’s faulty presumption that the gift of a house automatically carried with it some amount of land, “which includes access to water, sufficient evidence relative to the well, but only the fact that there is access to the water and that it includes access to highway ten, I-10 service road.” See id. at 196 n.1. | 1 | 2015–2015 |
Hill v. State
green
1 sentence2009Both Hill and Taylor involved a faulty instruction regarding the effect of "good conduct time." In both cases, the jury was instructed that good conduct time would be considered in determining eligibility for parole 8 They had tried the previous one together, with counsel sitting second chair as support for the new assistant. 9 Hill v. State, 30 S.W.3d 505 (Tex. App.—Texarkana 2000, no pet.). 10 Taylor v. State, 146 S.W.3d 801 (Tex. App.—Texarkana 2004, pet. ref'd). 23 in situations where good conduct time was not authorized. | 1 | 2009–2009 |
Taylor v. State
green
1 sentence2009Both Hill and Taylor involved a faulty instruction regarding the effect of "good conduct time." In both cases, the jury was instructed that good conduct time would be considered in determining eligibility for parole 8 They had tried the previous one together, with counsel sitting second chair as support for the new assistant. 9 Hill v. State, 30 S.W.3d 505 (Tex. App.—Texarkana 2000, no pet.). 10 Taylor v. State, 146 S.W.3d 801 (Tex. App.—Texarkana 2004, pet. ref'd). 23 in situations where good conduct time was not authorized. | 1 | 2009–2009 |
McVeigh v. State
neutral
2 sentences1989E.g., McVeigh v. State, 43 Tex.Cr.R. 17 , 62 S.W. 757 (1901). 1989E.g., McVeigh v. State, 43 Tex.Cr.R. 17 , 62 S.W. 757 (1901). | 1 | 1989–1989 |
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.