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 1960–2025 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 |
|---|---|---|
In Re Continental Airlines, Inc.green2 sentences2008See In re Cont'l Airlines , 988 S.W.2d 733, 736 (Tex. 1998). (2) Dr. Pepper contends that, even if this is an effort to enforce a mandatory venue statute, mandamus is not available here because the mandatory venue claim does not come within Chapter 15 of the Texas Civil Practice and Remedies Code. 2002See In re Cont'l Airlines , 988 S.W.2d 733, 736 (Tex. 1998). (2) Dr. Pepper contends that, even if this is an effort to enforce a mandatory venue statute, mandamus is not available here because the mandatory venue claim does not come within Chapter 15 of the Texas Civil Practice and Remedies Code. | 5 | 5 |
Brown v. Gulf Television Co.green2 sentences2004See id. 2004See id. | 3 | 3 |
Prairie View A&M University v. Diljit K. Chathagreen2 sentences2025To get there, it (correctly) observed that “[a] statutory prerequisite is a requirement that: (1) is found in the relevant statute; (2) is required by the relevant statute; and (3) must be met before the suit is filed.” Id. at 749 , 751 (citing Prairie View A&M Univ. v. Chatha, 381 S.W.3d 500 , 511–12 (Tex. 2012)). 2023See Chatha, 381 S.W.3d at 511–12. | 1 | 2 |
Kshatrya v. Texas Workforce Commissiongreen2 sentences2023Six Brothers cites Kshatrya v. Texas Workforce Commission, which held that the mandatory venue requirement in Section 61.062(d) of the Labor Code was not a jurisdictional requirement. 97 S.W.3d 825, 831 (Tex. App.— Dallas 2003 , no pet.). 2023Although the Kshatrya court concluded “there is nothing in the statutory language 7 suggesting [Section 61.062(d)] is a jurisdictional prerequisite,” Kshatrya, 97 S.W.3d at 831 , the court could not consider whether the mandatory venue requirement is a statutory prerequisite within the meaning of the final sentence of Section 311.034 because the legislature had not enacted the final sentence at that time.1 Kshatrya does not answer the question in this case: whether Section 61.062(d)’s mandatory venue requirement is a statutory prerequisite to suit within the meaning of Section 311.034. | 1 | 1 |
In Re Comptongreen2 sentences2014See Compton, 185 S.W.3d at 531 . 6 V. 2014See Compton, 185 S.W.3d at 531 .6 V. | 1 | 1 |
Cox Engineering, Inc. v. Funston MacHine & Supply Co.green1 sentence1998Cox Engineering, Inc., v. Funston Machine and *53 Supply Co., 749 S.W.2d 508, 512 (Tex.App.—Fort Worth 1988, no writ), and a review of that exhibit fails to establish a prima facie case of venue in Anderson County. 11 Ellis having failed to establish venue in Anderson County, the question then becomes whether venue should have been transferred to Harris County under the mandatory venue exception set forth in Section 15.018(b)(2). 12 As noted above, in its motion to transfer, the Railroad pleaded venue under Section 15.018, and Ellis’ Response did not specifically deny those venue facts as requ | 1 | 1 |
Gallagher v. Gallaghergreen1 sentence1988See Griffin v. Collins, 310 S.W.2d 137 (Tex.Civ.App.—Amarillo 1958, no writ); Knape v. Johanson, 170 S.W.2d 319 (Tex.Civ.App.—El Paso 1942, no writ); Gallagher v. Gallagher, 153 S.W.2d 541, 542 (Tex.Civ.App.—San Antonio 1941, writ dism’d). | 1 | 1 |
Griffin v. Collinsgreen1 sentence1988See Griffin v. Collins, 310 S.W.2d 137 (Tex.Civ.App.—Amarillo 1958, no writ); Knape v. Johanson, 170 S.W.2d 319 (Tex.Civ.App.—El Paso 1942, no writ); Gallagher v. Gallagher, 153 S.W.2d 541, 542 (Tex.Civ.App.—San Antonio 1941, writ dism’d). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Texas. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Leonard v. Paxson
green
2 sentences2008Id. at 441 . 2008Id. at 441 . | 2 | 2008–2008 |
Landbase, Inc. v. Texas Employment Commission
green
2 sentences2023The commission, on the other hand, cites Landbase, Inc. v. Texas Employment Commission, an opinion that predates both Kshatrya and the enactment of the final sentence of Section 311.034. 885 S.W.2d 499 (Tex. App.—San Antonio 1994, writ denied). 2023Id. at 501 . | 1 | 2023–2023 |
Knape v. Johanson
green
1 sentence1988See Griffin v. Collins, 310 S.W.2d 137 (Tex.Civ.App.—Amarillo 1958, no writ); Knape v. Johanson, 170 S.W.2d 319 (Tex.Civ.App.—El Paso 1942, no writ); Gallagher v. Gallagher, 153 S.W.2d 541, 542 (Tex.Civ.App.—San Antonio 1941, writ dism’d). | 1 | 1988–1988 |
Harrington v. Western National Bank of Amarillo
neutral
2 sentences1986In asserting that the case does fall within the mandatory venue requirement, appellants place primary reliance upon such cases as Dorfman Development Co. v. American Commonwealth Development Co., 523 S.W.2d 268 (Tex.Civ.App. — Houston [1st Dist.] 1975, no writ); Harrington v. Western National Bank of Amarillo, 572 S.W.2d 769 (Tex.Civ.App. — Amarillo 1978, no writ); Leonard v. Carter, 389 S.W.2d 147 (Tex.Civ.App. — Fort Worth 1965, writ dism’d). 1986In asserting that the case does fall within the mandatory venue requirement, appellants place primary reliance upon such cases as Dorfman Development Co. v. American Commonwealth Development Co., 523 S.W.2d 268 (Tex.Civ.App. — Houston [1st Dist.] 1975, no writ); Harrington v. Western National Bank of Amarillo, 572 S.W.2d 769 (Tex.Civ.App. — Amarillo 1978, no writ); Leonard v. Carter, 389 S.W.2d 147 (Tex.Civ.App. — Fort Worth 1965, writ dism’d). | 1 | 1986–1986 |
Dorfman Development Co. v. American Commonwealth Development Co.
green
2 sentences1986In asserting that the case does fall within the mandatory venue requirement, appellants place primary reliance upon such cases as Dorfman Development Co. v. American Commonwealth Development Co., 523 S.W.2d 268 (Tex.Civ.App. — Houston [1st Dist.] 1975, no writ); Harrington v. Western National Bank of Amarillo, 572 S.W.2d 769 (Tex.Civ.App. — Amarillo 1978, no writ); Leonard v. Carter, 389 S.W.2d 147 (Tex.Civ.App. — Fort Worth 1965, writ dism’d). 1986In asserting that the case does fall within the mandatory venue requirement, appellants place primary reliance upon such cases as Dorfman Development Co. v. American Commonwealth Development Co., 523 S.W.2d 268 (Tex.Civ.App. — Houston [1st Dist.] 1975, no writ); Harrington v. Western National Bank of Amarillo, 572 S.W.2d 769 (Tex.Civ.App. — Amarillo 1978, no writ); Leonard v. Carter, 389 S.W.2d 147 (Tex.Civ.App. — Fort Worth 1965, writ dism’d). | 1 | 1986–1986 |
Leonard v. Carter
green
2 sentences1986In asserting that the case does fall within the mandatory venue requirement, appellants place primary reliance upon such cases as Dorfman Development Co. v. American Commonwealth Development Co., 523 S.W.2d 268 (Tex.Civ.App. — Houston [1st Dist.] 1975, no writ); Harrington v. Western National Bank of Amarillo, 572 S.W.2d 769 (Tex.Civ.App. — Amarillo 1978, no writ); Leonard v. Carter, 389 S.W.2d 147 (Tex.Civ.App. — Fort Worth 1965, writ dism’d). 1986In asserting that the case does fall within the mandatory venue requirement, appellants place primary reliance upon such cases as Dorfman Development Co. v. American Commonwealth Development Co., 523 S.W.2d 268 (Tex.Civ.App. — Houston [1st Dist.] 1975, no writ); Harrington v. Western National Bank of Amarillo, 572 S.W.2d 769 (Tex.Civ.App. — Amarillo 1978, no writ); Leonard v. Carter, 389 S.W.2d 147 (Tex.Civ.App. — Fort Worth 1965, writ dism’d). | 1 | 1986–1986 |
Lott v. Fields
neutral
1 sentence1960Lott v. Fields, Tex. Civ.App., 236 S.W.2d 878 ; Tunstill v. Scott, 138 Tex. 425 , 160 S.W.2d 65 . | 1 | 1960–1960 |
Tunstill v. Scott
green
2 sentences1960Lott v. Fields, Tex. Civ.App., 236 S.W.2d 878 ; Tunstill v. Scott, 138 Tex. 425 , 160 S.W.2d 65 . 1960Lott v. Fields, Tex. Civ.App., 236 S.W.2d 878 ; Tunstill v. Scott, 138 Tex. 425 , 160 S.W.2d 65 . | 1 | 1960–1960 |
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.