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.
19 Texas opinions name it 1 courts 1996–2023 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 |
|---|---|---|
Creel v. Houston Industries, Inc.green2 sentences2004See Creel v. Houston Indus. , 124 S.W.3d 742, 753 (Tex. App.--Houston [1st Dist.] 2003, no pet.). 2004See Creel v. Houston Indus., 124 S.W.3d 742, 753 (Tex.App.-Houston [1st Dist.] 2003, no pet.). | 3 | 3 |
Lopez v. Muñoz, Hockema & Reed, L.L.P.green2 sentences2015Rita is likewise prevented from denying the existence and terms of the Survivor’s Trust by the doctrine of quasi estoppel.70 This doctrine applies to preclude a party from asserting, to another’s disadvantage, a right inconsistent with a position previously taken by him.71 The doctrine applies when it would be unconscionable to allow a person to maintain a position inconsistent with one in which he acquiesced, or through which he accepted a 68 Brown v. Lanier Worldwide, Inc., supra at 899. 69 DeWoody v. Rippley, 951 S.W.2d 935, 944 (Tex. App. – Fort Worth 1997, pet. dism’d by agreement). 70 Se 2015Rita is likewise prevented from denying the existence and terms of the Survivor’s Trust by the doctrine of quasi estoppel.70 This doctrine applies to preclude a party from asserting, to another’s disadvantage, a right inconsistent with a position previously taken by him.71 The doctrine applies when it would be unconscionable to allow a person to maintain a position inconsistent with one in which he acquiesced, or through which he accepted a 68 Brown v. Lanier Worldwide, Inc., supra at 899. 69 DeWoody v. Rippley, 951 S.W.2d 935, 944 (Tex. App. – Fort Worth 1997, pet. dism’d by agreement). 70 Se | 2 | 2 |
DeWoody v. Rippleygreen2 sentences2015Rita is likewise prevented from denying the existence and terms of the Survivor’s Trust by the doctrine of quasi estoppel.70 This doctrine applies to preclude a party from asserting, to another’s disadvantage, a right inconsistent with a position previously taken by him.71 The doctrine applies when it would be unconscionable to allow a person to maintain a position inconsistent with one in which he acquiesced, or through which he accepted a 68 Brown v. Lanier Worldwide, Inc., supra at 899. 69 DeWoody v. Rippley, 951 S.W.2d 935, 944 (Tex. App. – Fort Worth 1997, pet. dism’d by agreement). 70 Se 2015Rita is likewise prevented from denying the existence and terms of the Survivor’s Trust by the doctrine of quasi estoppel.70 This doctrine applies to preclude a party from asserting, to another’s disadvantage, a right inconsistent with a position previously taken by him.71 The doctrine applies when it would be unconscionable to allow a person to maintain a position inconsistent with one in which he acquiesced, or through which he accepted a 68 Brown v. Lanier Worldwide, Inc., supra at 899. 69 DeWoody v. Rippley, 951 S.W.2d 935, 944 (Tex. App. – Fort Worth 1997, pet. dism’d by agreement). 70 Se | 2 | 2 |
Atkinson Gas Co. v. Albrechtgreen2 sentences2015Rita is likewise prevented from denying the existence and terms of the Survivor’s Trust by the doctrine of quasi estoppel.70 This doctrine applies to preclude a party from asserting, to another’s disadvantage, a right inconsistent with a position previously taken by him.71 The doctrine applies when it would be unconscionable to allow a person to maintain a position inconsistent with one in which he acquiesced, or through which he accepted a 68 Brown v. Lanier Worldwide, Inc., supra at 899. 69 DeWoody v. Rippley, 951 S.W.2d 935, 944 (Tex. App. – Fort Worth 1997, pet. dism’d by agreement). 70 Se 2015Rita is likewise prevented from denying the existence and terms of the Survivor’s Trust by the doctrine of quasi estoppel.70 This doctrine applies to preclude a party from asserting, to another’s disadvantage, a right inconsistent with a position previously taken by him.71 The doctrine applies when it would be unconscionable to allow a person to maintain a position inconsistent with one in which he acquiesced, or through which he accepted a 68 Brown v. Lanier Worldwide, Inc., supra at 899. 69 DeWoody v. Rippley, 951 S.W.2d 935, 944 (Tex. App. – Fort Worth 1997, pet. dism’d by agreement). 70 Se | 2 | 2 |
Llopa, Inc. v. Nagelgreen1 sentence2023Healthcare Servs. 9 The Trust’s brief initially refers to Exhibit H, which is the original petition for divorce, but its argument focuses exclusively on the divorce decree. 12 v. Mainland Shopping Ctr., 589 S.W.3d 915 , 923–24 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 2019, no pet.); Llopa, Inc. v. Nagal, 956 S.W.2d 82, 87 (Tex. App.—San Antonio 1997, pet. denied). | 1 | 1 |
Gavenda v. Strata Energy, Inc.green1 sentence2019Civ. P. 629; Gavenda v. Strata Energy, Inc., 705 S.W.2d 690, 693 (Tex. 1986) (“[A]cts and omissions within the scope of [an 20 Izen contends that any complaint by the Trust concerning the constable’s sale or the provisions of the July 2010 final judgment amounts to “invited error.” Izen does not explain how the doctrine of invited error would apply under circumstances in which Izen did not present evidence of Ryals’s authorization for the sale and the Trust did not challenge the July 2010 final judgment. 23 attorney’s] employment are regarded as the client’s acts.”); see also Implied Authority | 1 | 1 |
Welch v. Hrabargreen1 sentence2007See Welch v. Hrabar, 110 S.W.3d 601, 610 (Tex.App.-Houston [14th Dist.] 2003, pet. denied) (“When an attorney’s testimony regarding his fees is un-controverted, clear, direct and positive, and not contradicted by any other witness or attendant circumstances, and there is nothing to indicate otherwise, and appellate court may, in the interest of judicial economy, render judgment for attorney’s fees.”) (citing Ragsdale, 801 S.W.2d at 882 and World Help v. Leisure Lifestyles, Inc., 977 S.W.2d 662, 684, 686 (Tex.App.-Fort Worth 1998, pet. denied)). | 1 | 1 |
World Help v. Leisure Lifestyles, Inc.green1 sentence2007See Welch v. Hrabar, 110 S.W.3d 601, 610 (Tex.App.-Houston [14th Dist.] 2003, pet. denied) (“When an attorney’s testimony regarding his fees is un-controverted, clear, direct and positive, and not contradicted by any other witness or attendant circumstances, and there is nothing to indicate otherwise, and appellate court may, in the interest of judicial economy, render judgment for attorney’s fees.”) (citing Ragsdale, 801 S.W.2d at 882 and World Help v. Leisure Lifestyles, Inc., 977 S.W.2d 662, 684, 686 (Tex.App.-Fort Worth 1998, pet. denied)). | 1 | 1 |
Ragsdale v. Progressive Voters Leaguegreen1 sentence2007See Welch v. Hrabar, 110 S.W.3d 601, 610 (Tex.App.-Houston [14th Dist.] 2003, pet. denied) (“When an attorney’s testimony regarding his fees is un-controverted, clear, direct and positive, and not contradicted by any other witness or attendant circumstances, and there is nothing to indicate otherwise, and appellate court may, in the interest of judicial economy, render judgment for attorney’s fees.”) (citing Ragsdale, 801 S.W.2d at 882 and World Help v. Leisure Lifestyles, Inc., 977 S.W.2d 662, 684, 686 (Tex.App.-Fort Worth 1998, pet. denied)). | 1 | 1 |
Killam Oil Co. v. Brunigreen2 sentences1996See id. at 265-266 , 266 n. 2. 1996See id. at 265-266 , 266 n. 2. | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Texas. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Texas a & M University-Kingsville v. Lawson
green
2 sentences2015In rebuffing the' State’s position, we said: With respect to the State’s contention [that] sovereign immunity deprives the trial court of jurisdiction to consider the Trust’s motion to clarify and enforce the agreed judgment, we find guidance in the supreme court’s plurality opinion in Texas A & M University — Kingsville v. Lawson, 87 S.W.3d 518 (Tex.2002). [[Image here]] We ... find the Lawson opinion provides a sufficient answer to the State’s contention [that] its agreed judgment settling its condemnation proceeding against the Trust cannot be judicially ■clarified or enforced because of so 2010With respect to the State’s contention sovereign immunity deprives the trial court of jurisdiction to consider the Trust’s motion to clarify and enforce the agreed judgment, [3] we find guidance in the supreme court = s plurality opinion in Texas A & M University B Kingsville v. Lawson, 87 S.W.3d 518 (Tex. 2002). | 4 | 2010–2015 |
Consolidated Healthcare Services, LLC D/B/A A1 Imaging Centers v. Mainland Shopping Center, LTD.
green
1 sentence2023Healthcare Servs. 9 The Trust’s brief initially refers to Exhibit H, which is the original petition for divorce, but its argument focuses exclusively on the divorce decree. 12 v. Mainland Shopping Ctr., 589 S.W.3d 915 , 923–24 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 2019, no pet.); Llopa, Inc. v. Nagal, 956 S.W.2d 82, 87 (Tex. App.—San Antonio 1997, pet. denied). | 1 | 2023–2023 |
Masterson v. Diocese of Northwest Texas
green
1 sentence2015The opinion “puts the presbytery in an untenable position legally.” Id. | 1 | 2015–2015 |
Burlington Resources Oil & Gas Co. v. San Juan Basin Royalty Trust
green
1 sentence2014No claim to original U.S. Government Works. 4 Burlington Resources Oil & Gas Co. LP v. San Juan Basin..., 249 S.W.3d 34 (2007) Jicarilla–Case A, violated the agreement and caused it to incur to arbitrate their dispute, that party must bear the burden substantial unnecessary expenses in defending the arbitration of demonstrating clearly and unmistakably that the parties and pursuing relief in the trial court. | 1 | 2014–2014 |
Nevels v. Harris
green
1 sentence2009Nevels, 102 S.W.2d at 1050 . 4 Kennon and the Trust’s issue raises a legal sufficiency challenge. | 1 | 2009–2009 |
In Re John G. Kenedy Memorial Foundation
green
1 sentence2004The Attorney General joined the Trust's motion to dismiss on August 21, 2003. [6] Case No. 02-2331-C ( Fernandez v. Exxon Mobil ). [7] For the disposition of a related mandamus proceeding, see " In re The John G. and Marie Stella Kenedy Memorial Foundation, et al., " 159 S.W.3d 133 (Tex.App.-Corpus Christi 2004, orig. proceeding), in which I dissented to granting extraordinary relief to the Foundation and Trust in an original proceeding challenging the statutory probate court's transfer powers. | 1 | 2004–2004 |
State v. Fernandez
green
1 sentence2004The Attorney General joined the Trust's motion to dismiss on August 21, 2003. [8] The Foundation itself sought one of the transfers it now challenges. [9] For disposition by this Court of a related interlocutory appeal, see The State of Texas v. Fernandez, No. 13-03-546-CV, ___ S.W.3d ___, 2004 WL 1335855 , 2004 LEXIS ___ (Tex. App-Corpus Christi June 15, 2004, no pet. h.). | 1 | 2004–2004 |
Smith v. State
green
2 sentences2003Smith , 752 S.W.2d at 125 . 2003In Smith, supra, the defendant was a trustee who testified that he withdrew money from a trust in violation of the trust agreement, but the money was nevertheless used for the benefit of the beneficiary. | 1 | 2003–2003 |
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.