5 Texas opinions name it 3 courts 1921–2025 1 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 |
|---|---|---|
In Re JFCgreen1 sentence2025See J.F.C., 96 S.W.3d at 266 ; C.H., 89 S.W.3d at 25 ; see also In re A.Q.W., 395 S.W.3d 285, 290 (Tex. App.—San Antonio 2013, no pet.) (evidence insufficient to support termination under Subsection (O) where father was not given a reasonable opportunity to complete service plan following release from incarceration); In re A.J.L., No. 04-14-00013-CV, 2014 WL 4723129 , at *5 (Tex. App.—San Antonio Sept. 24, 2014, no pet.) (mem. op.) (evidence not sufficient to support termination where parent had been complying with the service plan up until the time of incarceration); see also TEX. | 1 | 1 |
in the Interest of A.Q.W.green1 sentence2025See J.F.C., 96 S.W.3d at 266 ; C.H., 89 S.W.3d at 25 ; see also In re A.Q.W., 395 S.W.3d 285, 290 (Tex. App.—San Antonio 2013, no pet.) (evidence insufficient to support termination under Subsection (O) where father was not given a reasonable opportunity to complete service plan following release from incarceration); In re A.J.L., No. 04-14-00013-CV, 2014 WL 4723129 , at *5 (Tex. App.—San Antonio Sept. 24, 2014, no pet.) (mem. op.) (evidence not sufficient to support termination where parent had been complying with the service plan up until the time of incarceration); see also TEX. | 1 | 1 |
El Paso Field Services, L.P. and Gulfterra South Texas, L.P. F/K/A El Paso South Texas, L.P. v. Mastec North America, Inc. and Mastec, Inc.green1 sentence2019See El Paso Field Servs., 389 S.W.3d at 810 (declining to disallow parties to define requirements by contract and allocate risk by agreement, “a result that runs counter to the freedom to contract,” and refusing “to amend the contract judicially to substitute an unsupported standard for the contracted-for requirement” (citation omitted)). | 1 | 1 |
Thota v. Younggreen1 sentence2015In Thota v. Young, 366 S.W.3d 678, 689-91 (Tex. 2012), the Texas Supreme Court held that: (1) a no evidence objection is all that is necessary to preserve a complaint regarding the submission of a claim that is not supported by the evidence, and (2) a party is not required to point out to the trial court the problems that submitting a unsupported claim creates, which are discussed in Crown Life Ins. | 1 | 1 |
Crown Life Insurance Company v. Casteelgreen1 sentence2015Co. v. Casteel, 22 S.W.3d 378, 388 (Tex. 2000). | 1 | 1 |
Jackson v. Stategreen1 sentence1997See Jackson v. State, 826 S.W.2d 751, 752 (Tex.App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 1992, pet. ref'd). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Texas. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
In Re CH
green
1 sentence2025See J.F.C., 96 S.W.3d at 266 ; C.H., 89 S.W.3d at 25 ; see also In re A.Q.W., 395 S.W.3d 285, 290 (Tex. App.—San Antonio 2013, no pet.) (evidence insufficient to support termination under Subsection (O) where father was not given a reasonable opportunity to complete service plan following release from incarceration); In re A.J.L., No. 04-14-00013-CV, 2014 WL 4723129 , at *5 (Tex. App.—San Antonio Sept. 24, 2014, no pet.) (mem. op.) (evidence not sufficient to support termination where parent had been complying with the service plan up until the time of incarceration); see also TEX. | 1 | 2025–2025 |
White v. McCullough
green
2 sentences1921App. 383 , 120 S. W. 1093 , which held that, under the record in that case, where evidence was highly conflicting, one must recover, if at all, only when he has adduced evidence sufficient to convince reasonable minds that he has a title, as distinguished from an unsupported claim. 1921App. 383 , 120 S. W. 1093 , Justice Hodges says plaintiff can recover when he has adduced evidence “sufficient to convince reasonable minds that he has a title, as distinguished from an unsupported claim.” [3] Applying the above well-settled rules of law to the instant case, we find no evidence in the record controverting the identity of Sheldon E. | 1 | 1921–1921 |
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.