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 2 courts 2007–2022 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 |
|---|---|---|
Cuellar v. Stategreen2 sentences2016See generally Cuellar v. State, 70 S.W.3d 815, 821 (Tex.Crim.App.2002) (Cochran, J., concurring) (rule of lenity requires courts to adopt less harsh interpretation of penal statutes). 2016See generally Cuellar v. State, 70 S.W.3d 815, 821 (Tex. Crim. | 2 | 2 |
Coastal Industrial Water Authority v. W. D. Yorkgreen2 sentences2007Brainard, 12 S.W.3d at 19 (“A widely recognized exception to the general rule is that accretion does not belong to the owner of the land adjoining the water when the owner causes the accretion.”); York, 532 S.W.2d at 952 (“A riparian or littoral owner may not acquire title to submerged land through self-help by filling and raising the land level.”). 2007Brainard , 12 S.W.3d at 19 ( A A widely recognized exception to the general rule is that accretion does not belong to the owner of the land adjoining the water when the owner causes the accretion. @ ); York , 532 S.W.2d at 952 ( A A riparian or littoral owner may not acquire title to submerged land through self‑help by filling and raising the land level. @ ). | 2 | 2 |
Brainard v. Stategreen2 sentences2007Brainard, 12 S.W.3d at 19 (“A widely recognized exception to the general rule is that accretion does not belong to the owner of the land adjoining the water when the owner causes the accretion.”); York, 532 S.W.2d at 952 (“A riparian or littoral owner may not acquire title to submerged land through self-help by filling and raising the land level.”). 2007Brainard , 12 S.W.3d at 19 ( A A widely recognized exception to the general rule is that accretion does not belong to the owner of the land adjoining the water when the owner causes the accretion. @ ); York , 532 S.W.2d at 952 ( A A riparian or littoral owner may not acquire title to submerged land through self‑help by filling and raising the land level. @ ). | 2 | 2 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Texas. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Stuart v. Bayless
green
1 sentence2022Rep. 145 (1854), the widely recognized rule has been that consequential damages “are not recoverable unless the parties contemplated at the time they made the contract that such damages would be a probable result of the breach.” Stuart, 964 S.W.2d at 921 . | 1 | 2022–2022 |
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.