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 2003–2019 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 |
|---|---|---|
Wheeler v. Greengreen2 sentences2010See 157 S.W.3d at 443-44 . 2010See 157 S.W.3d at 443-44 . 4 Moreover, the trial court elicited and received oral testimony without any objection by either party at the summary judgment hearing, and that evidence was contrary to the merits-preclusive, deemed admissions concerning conversion.2 See Marshall v. Vise, 767 S.W.2d 699, 700 (Tex. 1989) (“We hold that a party waives the right to rely upon an opponent’s deemed admissions unless objection is made to the introduction of evidence contrary to those admissions.”). | 2 | 2 |
Mireles v. Texas Department of Public Safetygreen2 sentences2003See Mireles, 9 S.W.3d at 131 . 2003See Mireles, 9 S.W.3d at 131 . | 2 | 2 |
Marshall v. Visegreen1 sentence2010See 157 S.W.3d at 443-44 . 4 Moreover, the trial court elicited and received oral testimony without any objection by either party at the summary judgment hearing, and that evidence was contrary to the merits-preclusive, deemed admissions concerning conversion.2 See Marshall v. Vise, 767 S.W.2d 699, 700 (Tex. 1989) (“We hold that a party waives the right to rely upon an opponent’s deemed admissions unless objection is made to the introduction of evidence contrary to those admissions.”). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Texas. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
State v. Moff
green
1 sentence2019The defendant is entitled to “notice that is specific enough to allow him to investigate the allegations against him and establish a defense.” Moff, 154 S.W.3d at 602 . 3 Specificity of Indictment In its first issue, the State contends that the trial court erred in granting Mireles’s motion to quash because an aggregated-theft indictment does not require that each specific act of theft be alleged. | 1 | 2019–2019 |
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.