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.
18 Texas opinions name it 4 courts 1932–2025 2 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 |
|---|---|---|
Gharda USA, Inc. and Gharda Chemicals, Ltd. v. Control Solutions, Inc., United Phosphorus, Inc., and Mark Boydgreen2 sentences2025When expert testimony is offered to prove causation in circumstances like these, the expert’s testimony, to be reliable, “must be based on a probability standard, rather than on mere possibility.” See Gharda USA, Inc. v. Control Sols., Inc., 464 S.W.3d 338, 349 (Tex. 2015); accord Columbia Med. 2024To be reliable, an expert’s opinion “must be based on a probability standard, rather than on mere possibility.” Gharda USA, Inc. v. Control Sols., Inc., 464 S.W.3d 338, 349 (Tex. 2015). | 4 | 4 |
Gonzales v. Stategreen2 sentences2015Loredo v. State, 59 S.W.3d 289, 293 (Tex. App.-Corpus Christi 2001, no pet.) (holding trial court error in refusing to allow defense counsel to ask proper questions about parole was harmful and noting such error will rarely be harmless); Gonzales v. State, 2 S.W.3d 600, 606 (Tex. App.-Texarkana 1999, pet. ref’d) (noting that prudent defense counsel—when faced with trial court error preventing him from questioning potential jurors about their attitudes toward a specific defense—would not attempt to present evidence of that defense to jury). 2001Gonzales v. State, 2 S.W.3d 600, 606 (Tex.Crim.App.1999) (citing Cain v. State, 947 S.W.2d 262, 264 (Tex.Crim.App.1997)). | 3 | 3 |
In Re Huntergreen2 sentences2004If the violation is likely to recur, removal is appropriate.'" In re Hunter , (La. 8/19/02), http://www.lasc.org/opinions/2002/02o1975.opn.pdf, p. [15], 823 So.2d 325 , 336 (quoting In re Field , 281 Or. 623 , 576 P.2d 348 , 354 (1978)). 2004If the violation is likely to recur, removal is appropriate.’ ” In re Hunter, (La.8/19/02), http://www.lasc.org/opin-ions/2002/02ol975.opn.pdf, p. [15], 823 So.2d 325, 336 (quoting In re Field, 281 Or. 623 , 576 P.2d 348, 354 (1978)). | 1 | 2 |
Matter of Fieldgreen2 sentences2004If the violation is likely to recur, removal is appropriate.'" In re Hunter , (La. 8/19/02), http://www.lasc.org/opinions/2002/02o1975.opn.pdf, p. [15], 823 So.2d 325 , 336 (quoting In re Field , 281 Or. 623 , 576 P.2d 348 , 354 (1978)). 2004If the violation is likely to recur, removal is appropriate.'" In re Hunter , (La. 8/19/02), http://www.lasc.org/opinions/2002/02o1975.opn.pdf, p. [15], 823 So.2d 325 , 336 (quoting In re Field , 281 Or. 623 , 576 P.2d 348 , 354 (1978)). | 1 | 2 |
Columbia Medical Center of Las Colinas, Inc. v. Hoguegreen1 sentence2025Ctr. of Las Colinas, Inc. v. Hogue, 271 S.W.3d 238, 247 (Tex. 2008) (“‘Perhaps’ and ‘possibly’ indicate conjecture, speculation or mere possibility rather than qualified opinions based on reasonable medical probability.”); General Motors Corp. v. Iracheta, 161 S.W.3d 462 , 469 & n.28, 471–72 14 (Tex. 2005) (expert’s testimony of mere “possibility”—using that word—of fuel hose’s failure was legally insufficient). | 1 | 1 |
Dora Gulley v. State Farm Lloydsgreen1 sentence2024“Opinion testimony that is conclusory or speculative is not relevant evidence and cannot support a judgment.” Gulley v. State Farm Lloyds, 461 S.W.3d 563, 571 (Tex. App.—San Antonio 2014, pet. denied). | 1 | 1 |
Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twomblygreen1 sentence2015While a complaint need not contain detailed factual allegations, it must set forth "more than labels and conclusions, and a formulaic recitation of the elements of a cause of action will not do." Twomblv, 550 U.S. at 555 (citation omitted). | 1 | 1 |
Graham v. Floridagreen1 sentence2015Cf. Miller, 132 S. Ct. at 2469 ; Graham, 560 U.S. at 75, 82 .13 No such deprivation has been proved. | 1 | 1 |
Loredo v. Stategreen1 sentence2015Loredo v. State, 59 S.W.3d 289, 293 (Tex. App.-Corpus Christi 2001, no pet.) (holding trial court error in refusing to allow defense counsel to ask proper questions about parole was harmful and noting such error will rarely be harmless); Gonzales v. State, 2 S.W.3d 600, 606 (Tex. App.-Texarkana 1999, pet. ref’d) (noting that prudent defense counsel—when faced with trial court error preventing him from questioning potential jurors about their attitudes toward a specific defense—would not attempt to present evidence of that defense to jury). | 1 | 1 |
Whirlpool Corp. v. Camachogreen1 sentence2015See id. at 637-38 ; Mack Trucks, Inc., 206 S.W.3d at 580 ; Volkswagen of Am., Inc. v. Ramirez, 159 S.W.3d 897, 904-05 (Tex.2004); Reliable expert testimony must be based on a probability standard, rather than on mere possibility. | 1 | 1 |
Volkswagen of America, Inc. v. Ramirezgreen1 sentence2015See id. at 637-38 ; Mack Trucks, Inc., 206 S.W.3d at 580 ; Volkswagen of Am., Inc. v. Ramirez, 159 S.W.3d 897, 904-05 (Tex.2004); Reliable expert testimony must be based on a probability standard, rather than on mere possibility. | 1 | 1 |
Kramer v. Lewisville Memorial Hospitalgreen1 sentence2015Kramer v. Lewisville Mem’l Hosp., 858 S.W.2d 397, 400 (Tex.1993). | 1 | 1 |
Cain v. Stategreen1 sentence2001Gonzales v. State, 2 S.W.3d 600, 606 (Tex.Crim.App.1999) (citing Cain v. State, 947 S.W.2d 262, 264 (Tex.Crim.App.1997)). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Texas. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
United States v. Castillo
green
2 sentences2015Engaging in a probability analysis, the district court determined that the facts “easily surmount the threshold required for reasonable suspicion.” Id. at 677 . 2015Engaging in a probability analysis, the district court determined that the facts “easily surmount the threshold required for reasonable suspicion.” Id. at 677 . | 2 | 2015–2015 |
General Motors Corp. v. Iracheta
green
1 sentence2025Ctr. of Las Colinas, Inc. v. Hogue, 271 S.W.3d 238, 247 (Tex. 2008) (“‘Perhaps’ and ‘possibly’ indicate conjecture, speculation or mere possibility rather than qualified opinions based on reasonable medical probability.”); General Motors Corp. v. Iracheta, 161 S.W.3d 462 , 469 & n.28, 471–72 14 (Tex. 2005) (expert’s testimony of mere “possibility”—using that word—of fuel hose’s failure was legally insufficient). | 1 | 2025–2025 |
Ashcroft v. Iqbal
green
1 sentence2015The plausibility standard is not akin to a probability requirement,' but it asks for more than a sheer possibility that a defendant has acted unlawfully." Ashcroft v. Igbai 556 U.S. 662 . 678 f2009) (internal citations omitted). | 1 | 2015–2015 |
MacK Trucks, Inc. v. Tamez
green
1 sentence2015See id. at 637-38 ; Mack Trucks, Inc., 206 S.W.3d at 580 ; Volkswagen of Am., Inc. v. Ramirez, 159 S.W.3d 897, 904-05 (Tex.2004); Reliable expert testimony must be based on a probability standard, rather than on mere possibility. | 1 | 2015–2015 |
Miller v. Alabama
green
1 sentence2015Cf. Miller, 132 S. Ct. at 2469 ; Graham, 560 U.S. at 75, 82 .13 No such deprivation has been proved. | 1 | 2015–2015 |
Andrade v. State
green
1 sentence2015Conclusion..................................................................................31 PRAYER ..............................................................................................................32 CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE.....................................................................32 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE..............................................................................33 ii TABLE OF AUTHORITIES Cases Andrade v. State, 700 S.W.2d 585 (Tex. Crim. | 1 | 2015–2015 |
State v. Bible
green
1 sentence1995Bible, 858 P.2d at 1188-1189 . | 1 | 1995–1995 |
Hassell v. Pruner
green
1 sentence1973Hassell v. Pruner, 286 S.W.2d 266 , (Tex.Civ.App. — Amarillo 1956, n. r. e.). | 1 | 1973–1973 |
Moore v. Ivey
neutral
1 sentence1932In the case of Moore v. Ivey, 277 S. W. 106 , by Section A of our Commission of Appeals, in an opinion especially approved by our Supreme Court, it was held that if, upon a consideration of the whole of the pertinent record, it is reasonably doubtful whether improper conduct of the jury affected the .amount of the verdict or decision of any other material issue, the verdict should be set aside hy the trial judge; and, if a new trial is not .granted, there is an abuse of discretion by .the trial judge, and a reversal becomes the duty of the appellate court; and further, when misconduct of the j | 1 | 1932–1932 |
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.