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 2004–2014 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 |
|---|---|---|
Zapata v. Ford Motor Credit Co.green2 sentences2004See Zapata v. Ford Motor Credit Co., 615 S.W.2d 198, 201 (Tex.1981); Omnibus Int’l, Inc., Ill S.W.3d at 826. 2004See Zapata v. Ford Motor Credit Co ., 615 S.W.2d 198, 201 (Tex. 1981); Omnibus Int = l, Inc ., 111 S.W.3d at 826 . | 2 | 2 |
Chair King, Inc. v. GTE Mobilnet of Houston, Inc.green1 sentence2010Id. (citing Restatement (2d) of Torts § 222A comt. c)); see Chair King, Inc. v. GTE Mobilnet of Houston, Inc., 135 S.W.3d 365, 395 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.]. 2004), rev’d on other grounds, 184 S.W.3d 707 (Tex. 2006). | 1 | 1 |
Express One International, Inc. v. Steinbeckgreen1 sentence2004See Express One Int’l, Inc., 53 S.W.3d at 900-01 (affirming summary judgment where claimant did not adduce evidence raising fact issue as to invasion-of-privacy claim). 2.Trespass to Chattels As to the trespass-to-chattels claim, for liability to attach, the wrongful interference with the chattel must have caused actual damage to the property or deprived the owner of its use for a substantial period. | 1 | 1 |
Omnibus International, Inc. v. at & T, Inc.green2 sentences2004See Omnibus Int = l, Inc ., 111 S.W.3d at 826 . 3. 2004See Zapata v. Ford Motor Credit Co ., 615 S.W.2d 198, 201 (Tex. 1981); Omnibus Int = l, Inc ., 111 S.W.3d at 826 . | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Texas. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Hankey v. Employer's Casualty Co.
green
2 sentences2010Id. (citing Restatement (2d) of Torts § 222A comt. c)); see Chair King, Inc. v. GTE Mobilnet of Houston, Inc., 135 S.W.3d 365, 395 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.]. 2004), rev’d on other grounds, 184 S.W.3d 707 (Tex. 2006). 2010Id. (citing RESTATEMENT 9 The handbook also defines contraband as an “item altered from its original condition.” The amended motion to dismiss argued that the typewriter was altered from its original condition to accommodate the contraband, but the defendants presented no evidence that is was altered, and Simmonds disputes that it was altered, stating that he merely placed the white-out and tape inside the typewriter. | 2 | 2010–2010 |
United States v. Jones
green
1 sentence2014Jones, 132 S.Ct. at 953 . | 1 | 2014–2014 |
Chair King, Inc. v. GTE Mobilnet of Houston, Inc.
green
1 sentence2010Id. (citing Restatement (2d) of Torts § 222A comt. c)); see Chair King, Inc. v. GTE Mobilnet of Houston, Inc., 135 S.W.3d 365, 395 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.]. 2004), rev’d on other grounds, 184 S.W.3d 707 (Tex. 2006). | 1 | 2010–2010 |
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.