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.
20 Texas opinions name it 2 courts 2003–2024 11 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 |
|---|---|---|
Ad Villarai, LLC v. Chan Il Pakgreen2 sentences2024Id. (citing Ad Villarai, 519 S.W.3d at 135 ). 2023“A party may rebut the presumption by demonstrating that the record evidence does not support a presumed finding.” Id. | 5 | 9 |
Zac Smith & Co. v. Otis Elevator Co.green2 sentences2019See Zac Smith & Co. v. Otis Elevator Co., 734 S.W.2d 662, 666 (Tex. 1987). 1 When the trial court failed to file findings of fact and conclusions of law, Oney timely filed a notice of past due findings of fact and conclusions of law. 2017See Zac Smith & Co. v. Otis Elevator Co., 734 S.W.2d 662, 666 (Tex. 1987). | 2 | 2 |
In Re VRWgreen2 sentences2003Halsell, 810 S.W.2d at 371 ; In re V.R.W., 41 S.W.3d 183, 194 (Tex.App.-Houston [14th Dist.] 2001, no pet.); Wittie, 786 S.W.2d at 466 . 2003Halsell, 810 S.W.2d at 371 ; In re V.R.W., 41 S.W.3d 183, 194 (Tex.App.-Houston [14th Dist.] 2001, no pet.); Wittie, 786 S.W.2d at 466 . | 2 | 2 |
Worford v. Stampergreen1 sentence2023“In determining whether some evidence supports the judgment and the implied findings of fact, it is proper to consider only that evidence most favorable to the issue and to disregard entirely that which is opposed to it or contradictory in its nature.” Worford v. Stamper, 801 S.W.2d 108, 109 (Tex. 1990) (internal quotation marks omitted). | 1 | 1 |
General Motors Corp. v. Gaylegreen1 sentence2021P. 220 (providing that cause may not be removed from jury docket over party’s objection); E.E., 598 S.W.3d at 397 (noting that even if jury demand is untimely, court must conduct jury trial if it can be done without interfering with court’s docket, delaying trial, or injuring opposing party (quoting General Motors Corp. v. Gayle, 951 S.W.2d 469, 476 (Tex. 1997)); In re M.A., No. 14- 05-00579-CV, 2007 WL 2873307 , at *2 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] Oct. 4, 2007, no pet.) (mem. op.) (While “a party may rebut the presumption [of a timely jury demand] by showing that the granting of a jury tria | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Texas. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Halsell v. Dehoyos
green
2 sentences2009Halsell , 810 S.W.2d at 371 . 2009Halsell, 810 S.W.2d at 371 . | 5 | 2003–2009 |
BMC Software Belgium, NV v. Marchand
green
2 sentences2024“A party may rebut the presumption by demonstrating that the record evidence does not support a presumed finding.” Id. at 135; Marchand, 83 S.W.3d at 795 . 2023Id. | 2 | 2023–2024 |
Wittie v. Skees
green
2 sentences2003Halsell, 810 S.W.2d at 371 ; In re V.R.W., 41 S.W.3d 183, 194 (Tex.App.-Houston [14th Dist.] 2001, no pet.); Wittie, 786 S.W.2d at 466 . 2003Halsell, 810 S.W.2d at 371 ; In re V.R.W., 41 S.W.3d 183, 194 (Tex.App.-Houston [14th Dist.] 2001, no pet.); Wittie, 786 S.W.2d at 466 . | 2 | 2003–2003 |
Sims v. Fitzpatrick
green
1 sentence2019Sims, 288 S.W.3d at 102 . | 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.