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.
17 Texas opinions name it 2 courts 2015–2023 5 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 |
|---|---|---|
In re Lipskygreen2 sentences2022In reaching this conclusion, we are mindful and follow the supreme court’s directive that at this stage in the litigation, the clear-and-specific-evidence requirement “neither imposes a heightened evidentiary burden nor categorically rejects the use of circumstantial evidence when determining the plaintiff’s prima- facie-case burden.” See Sierra Club, 463 S.W.3d at 867 (citing Lipsky, 460 S.W.3d at 587 ). 2021The clear-and-specific- evidence standard of the TCPA requires more than “mere notice pleading”; the nonmovant must “provide enough detail to show the factual basis for its claim.” Id. at 591 . | 6 | 12 |
Stephen Nolan Bedford, Also Known as Nolan Bedford v. Darin Spassoff and 6 Tool, LLC, Formerly Known as Dallas Dodgers Baseball Club LLC, D/B/A Dallas Dodgers Baseballgreen2 sentences2022The supreme court has explained the clear-and-specific evidence standard requires a plaintiff to “provide enough detail to show the factual basis for its claim.” Bedford v. Spassoff, 520 S.W.3d 901 , 904 13 (Tex. 2017) (per curiam) (internal quotation omitted). 2019Cf. Bedford v. Spassoff, 520 S.W.3d 901, 906 (Tex. 2017) (explaining in defamation case that general 19 “‘averments of direct economic losses and lost profits’ do not satisfy the Act’s clear-and- specific-evidence standard without ‘specific facts illustrating how [a defendant’s] alleged remarks about [a plaintiff’s] activities actually caused such losses’” (quoting Lipsky, 460 S.W.3d at 592-93 )); Grant v. Pivot Tech. | 3 | 5 |
Moore v. Stategreen1 sentence2020See Bedford, 520 S.W.3d at 906 (“‘[G]eneral averments of direct economic losses and lost profits’ do not satisfy the Act’s clear-and-specific-evidence standard without ‘specific facts illustrating how [a defendant’s] alleged remarks about [a plaintiff’s] activities actually caused such losses.’” (quoting Lipsky, 460 S.W.3d at 592–93)). | 1 | 1 |
Ryan R. Grant (Individually, and as Trustee of the Ryan R. Grant 2007 Trust) Laura Grant Jana Grimes John E. Grimes (Trustee of the John E. Grimes 2007 Trust) Anne Fielding Scott Sizemore John D. Rowell Herschel Sova v. Pivot Technology Solutions, Ltd. Pivot Acquisition Corp. And ARC Acquisition (US), Inc.green1 sentence2019Sols., Ltd., 556 S.W.3d 865, 882-83 (Tex. App.—Austin 2018, pet. filed) (concluding that plaintiffs’ pleadings failed “to provide the element-by-element, claim-by-claim factual specificity required by the Act with regard to damages” when generally stating that they have sustained damages in amount that will be proven at trial). | 1 | 1 |
Guajardo v. Conwellgreen1 sentence2016App. P. 34.1 (describing the official appellate record as the clerk’s record and reporter’s record); Guajardo v. Conwell, 46 S.W.3d 862, 864 (Tex.2001) (stating supreme court would not consider a document that was not in the clerk’s record); In re Guardianship of Winn, 372 S.W.3d 291, 297 (Tex.App.-Dallas 2012, no pet.) (refusing to consider documents not contained in appellate record). . | 1 | 1 |
In re Guardianship of Winngreen1 sentence2016App. P. 34.1 (describing the official appellate record as the clerk’s record and reporter’s record); Guajardo v. Conwell, 46 S.W.3d 862, 864 (Tex.2001) (stating supreme court would not consider a document that was not in the clerk’s record); In re Guardianship of Winn, 372 S.W.3d 291, 297 (Tex.App.-Dallas 2012, no pet.) (refusing to consider documents not contained in appellate record). . | 1 | 1 |
Cherokee Water Co. v. Advance Oil & Gas Co.green1 sentence2015The thrust of these cases is that appellant's lis pendens filings enabled contracting parties to exercise rights they already had. 2 Judgment at p. 11; cf, Archer v. Blakemore, 367 S.W. 402 (Tex. App. - Austin, 1963) (deed cancellation authorized to correct attorney's in-kind compensation at an exorbitant rate for legal services provided during attorney-client relationship), and James, et al, v. Calkins, 446 S.W.3d 135 (Tex. App. - Houston [1st Dist.] 2014),); and Cherokee Water, Co. v Advance Oil & Gas, Co., 843 S.W. 2d 132, 135 (Tex. App. - Texarkana 1992, writ den'd) (no independent cause o | 1 | 1 |
La Jolla Group II v. Brucegreen1 sentence2015The thrust of these cases is that appellant's lis pendens filings enabled contracting parties to exercise rights they already had. 2 Judgment at p. 11; cf, Archer v. Blakemore, 367 S.W. 402 (Tex. App. - Austin, 1963) (deed cancellation authorized to correct attorney's in-kind compensation at an exorbitant rate for legal services provided during attorney-client relationship), and James, et al, v. Calkins, 446 S.W.3d 135 (Tex. App. - Houston [1st Dist.] 2014),); and Cherokee Water, Co. v Advance Oil & Gas, Co., 843 S.W. 2d 132, 135 (Tex. App. - Texarkana 1992, writ den'd) (no independent cause o | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Texas. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Andrews County, Texas, Andrews Industrial Foundation, and Andrews Chamber of Commerce v. Sierra Club
green
1 sentence2022In reaching this conclusion, we are mindful and follow the supreme court’s directive that at this stage in the litigation, the clear-and-specific-evidence requirement “neither imposes a heightened evidentiary burden nor categorically rejects the use of circumstantial evidence when determining the plaintiff’s prima- facie-case burden.” See Sierra Club, 463 S.W.3d at 867 (citing Lipsky, 460 S.W.3d at 587 ). | 1 | 2022–2022 |
Antoinette Anderson v. Law Firm of Shorty, Dooley
green
1 sentence2015The thrust of these cases is that appellant's lis pendens filings enabled contracting parties to exercise rights they already had. 2 Judgment at p. 11; cf, Archer v. Blakemore, 367 S.W. 402 (Tex. App. - Austin, 1963) (deed cancellation authorized to correct attorney's in-kind compensation at an exorbitant rate for legal services provided during attorney-client relationship), and James, et al, v. Calkins, 446 S.W.3d 135 (Tex. App. - Houston [1st Dist.] 2014),); and Cherokee Water, Co. v Advance Oil & Gas, Co., 843 S.W. 2d 132, 135 (Tex. App. - Texarkana 1992, writ den'd) (no independent cause o | 1 | 2015–2015 |
James v. Calkins
green
1 sentence2015The thrust of these cases is that appellant's lis pendens filings enabled contracting parties to exercise rights they already had. 2 Judgment at p. 11; cf, Archer v. Blakemore, 367 S.W. 402 (Tex. App. - Austin, 1963) (deed cancellation authorized to correct attorney's in-kind compensation at an exorbitant rate for legal services provided during attorney-client relationship), and James, et al, v. Calkins, 446 S.W.3d 135 (Tex. App. - Houston [1st Dist.] 2014),); and Cherokee Water, Co. v Advance Oil & Gas, Co., 843 S.W. 2d 132, 135 (Tex. App. - Texarkana 1992, writ den'd) (no independent cause o | 1 | 2015–2015 |