24 Texas opinions name it 3 courts 1990–2025 3 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 |
|---|---|---|
Dun and Bradstreet, Inc. v. O'NEILgreen2 sentences2019Id. (citing Dun & Bradstreet, Inc. v. O’Neil, 456 S.W.2d 896, 898 (Tex. 1970)). 2018If the defendant establishes that the privilege attaches, then “the burden shifts to the plaintiff to prove that the defendant made the statements with actual malice.” Id. (citing Dun & Bradstreet, Inc. v. O’Neil, 456 S.W.2d 896, 898 (Tex. 1970)). | 3 | 3 |
Favors v. Yaffegreen2 sentences2014See Favors, 605 S.W.2d at 344 ; Tex. Bus. & Com.Code Ann. § 3.308(b) (Vernon 2002). 2014See Favors, 605 S.W.2d at 344 ; Tex. Bus. & Com. | 2 | 2 |
Whitney v. L & L REALTY CORPORATIONgreen2 sentences2006See Whitney, 500 S.W.2d at 95-96 . 2006See Whitney, 500 S.W.2d at 95-96 . | 2 | 2 |
Neal v. Stategreen2 sentences2024A defendant establishes a claim for vindictive prosecution by offering either: 1) proof of circumstances that pose a “realistic likelihood” of such misconduct sufficient to raise a “presumption of prosecutorial vindictiveness,” which the State must rebut or face dismissal of the charges;[] or 2) proof of “actual vindictiveness”—that is, direct evidence that the prosecutor’s charging decision is an unjustifiable penalty resulting solely from the defendant’s exercise of a protected legal right. 13 Neal, 150 S.W.3d at 173 (first citing United States v. Johnson, 171 F.3d 139 , 140–41 (2d Cir.1999) 2009A defendant establishes such a claim by proving with objective evidence that the prosecutor’s charging decision was a “direct and unjustifiable penalty” that resulted “solely from the defendant’s exercise of a protected legal right.” Id. | 1 | 6 |
Strickland v. Colemangreen2 sentences2023Id. at 192 . 1998Strickland, 824 S.W.2d at 191-92 ; Tex.Bus. & Com.Code Ann. § 3.308 (Vernon Supp.1998). | 1 | 3 |
Turner v. KTRK Television, Inc.green1 sentence2020Co., 884 S.W.2d 771, 772 (Tex. 1994) (per curiam)); see also Turner, 38 S.W.3d at 120 (noting that “reckless disregard” in defamation context means that defendant “entertained serious doubts as to the truth of his publication” (citation omitted)). | 1 | 1 |
Hagler v. Proctor & Gamble Manufacturing Co.green1 sentence2020Co., 884 S.W.2d 771, 772 (Tex. 1994) (per curiam)); see also Turner, 38 S.W.3d at 120 (noting that “reckless disregard” in defamation context means that defendant “entertained serious doubts as to the truth of his publication” (citation omitted)). | 1 | 1 |
KPMG Peat Marwick v. Harrison County Housing Finance Corp.green1 sentence2013See id. | 1 | 1 |
Demouchette v. Stategreen1 sentence2006Demouchette v. State , 731 S.W.2d 75, 83 (Tex. Crim. | 1 | 1 |
Guaranty Federal Savings Bank v. Horseshoe Operating Co.green2 sentences1991Guaranty Federal Sav. & Loan Ass'n. v. Horseshoe Operating Co., 748 S.W.2d 519, 528 (Tex.App.Dallas 1988), affirmed in part and reversed in part, 793 S.W.2d 652, 659 (Tex.1990); Tex.Bus. & Com.Code Ann. § 3.307 (Vernon 1968). 1991Guaranty Federal Sav. & Loan Ass’n. v. Horseshoe Operating Co., 748 S.W.2d 519, 528 (Tex.App.—Dallas 1988), affirmed in part and reversed in part, 793 S.W.2d 652, 659 (Tex.1990); Tex.Bus. & Com.Code Ann. § 3.307 (Vernon 1968). | 1 | 1 |
Guaranty Federal Savings & Loan Ass'n v. Horseshoe Operating Co.green2 sentences1991Guaranty Federal Sav. & Loan Ass'n. v. Horseshoe Operating Co., 748 S.W.2d 519, 528 (Tex.App.Dallas 1988), affirmed in part and reversed in part, 793 S.W.2d 652, 659 (Tex.1990); Tex.Bus. & Com.Code Ann. § 3.307 (Vernon 1968). 1991Guaranty Federal Sav. & Loan Ass’n. v. Horseshoe Operating Co., 748 S.W.2d 519, 528 (Tex.App.—Dallas 1988), affirmed in part and reversed in part, 793 S.W.2d 652, 659 (Tex.1990); Tex.Bus. & Com.Code Ann. § 3.307 (Vernon 1968). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Texas. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Cain v. Hearst Corp.
green
2 sentences2020If a defendant establishes the privilege, the burden shifts to the plaintiff to prove that the defendant made the statement with actual malice, which as discussed above, means “the making of a statement with knowledge that it is false, or with reckless disregard of whether it is true.” Id. (quoting Hagler v. Proctor & Gamble Mfg. 2018If the defendant establishes that the privilege attaches, then “the burden shifts to the plaintiff to prove that the defendant made the statements with actual malice.” Id. (citing Dun & Bradstreet, Inc. v. O’Neil, 456 S.W.2d 896, 898 (Tex. 1970)). | 3 | 2018–2025 |
Allen Chadwick Burbage v. W. Kirk Burbage and Burbage Funeral Home
green
2 sentences2015Jamie Graham Page 8 of 20 447 S.W.3d 249, *254 ; 2014 Tex. LEXIS 753 , **5 injunction. 447 S.W.3d 291, 303 , 2011 Tex. a defendant establishes the privilege, the App. LEXIS 10034, *25 (Tex. App.—Austin burden shifts to the plaintiff to prove that 2011, pet. granted) (mem. op.). 2015Jamie Graham Page 8 of 20 447 S.W.3d 249, *254 ; 2014 Tex. LEXIS 753 , **5 injunction. 447 S.W.3d 291, 303 , 2011 Tex. a defendant establishes the privilege, the App. LEXIS 10034, *25 (Tex. App.—Austin burden shifts to the plaintiff to prove that 2011, pet. granted) (mem. op.). | 3 | 2015–2020 |
United States v. Kenneth Johnson
green
1 sentence2024A defendant establishes a claim for vindictive prosecution by offering either: 1) proof of circumstances that pose a “realistic likelihood” of such misconduct sufficient to raise a “presumption of prosecutorial vindictiveness,” which the State must rebut or face dismissal of the charges;[] or 2) proof of “actual vindictiveness”—that is, direct evidence that the prosecutor’s charging decision is an unjustifiable penalty resulting solely from the defendant’s exercise of a protected legal right. 13 Neal, 150 S.W.3d at 173 (first citing United States v. Johnson, 171 F.3d 139 , 140–41 (2d Cir.1999) | 1 | 2024–2024 |
United States v. Goodwin
green
2 sentences2024A defendant establishes a claim for vindictive prosecution by offering either: 1) proof of circumstances that pose a “realistic likelihood” of such misconduct sufficient to raise a “presumption of prosecutorial vindictiveness,” which the State must rebut or face dismissal of the charges;[] or 2) proof of “actual vindictiveness”—that is, direct evidence that the prosecutor’s charging decision is an unjustifiable penalty resulting solely from the defendant’s exercise of a protected legal right. 13 Neal, 150 S.W.3d at 173 (first citing United States v. Johnson, 171 F.3d 139 , 140–41 (2d Cir.1999) 2024A defendant establishes such a claim by proving with objective evidence that the prosecutor’s charging decision was a “direct and unjustifiable penalty” that resulted “solely from the defendant’s exercise of a protected legal right.” Id. (citing Goodwin, 457 U.S. at 384 & n.19). | 1 | 2024–2024 |
Denton Publishing Company v. Boyd
green
1 sentence2019Id. (citing Dun & Bradstreet, Inc. v. O’Neil, 456 S.W.2d 896, 898 (Tex. 1970)). | 1 | 2019–2019 |
Allen Chadwick Burbage v. W. Kirk Burbage and Burbage Funeral Home
green
1 sentence2015Jamie Graham Page 8 of 20 447 S.W.3d 249, *254 ; 2014 Tex. LEXIS 753 , **5 injunction. 447 S.W.3d 291, 303 , 2011 Tex. a defendant establishes the privilege, the App. LEXIS 10034, *25 (Tex. App.—Austin burden shifts to the plaintiff to prove that 2011, pet. granted) (mem. op.). | 1 | 2015–2015 |
Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.
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.