statute contains requirement (Texas) · Go Syfert
← Texas issues

statute contains requirement in Texas

16 Texas opinions name it 3 courts 1922–2026 4 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.

Followed or applied (8)

CaseFollowedCited
F & H INVESTMENTS INC. v. Stategreen
texapp · 2001 · cited in 4 Texas opinions naming this issue, 2003–2005
2 sentences

2005Article 18.18(a); see F & H Investments Inc. v. State , 55 S.W.3d 663, 667 (Tex.App.-Waco 2001, no pet.).

2003Article 18.18(a); see F & H Investments Inc. v. State, 55 S.W.3d 663, 667 (Tex.App.-Waco 2001, no pet.).

44
In Re Millergreen
texapp · 2004 · cited in 3 Texas opinions naming this issue, 2006–2009
2 sentences

2009See id.; In re Miller, 133 S.W.3d 816, 818-19 (Tex. App.–Beaumont 2004, orig. proceeding) (rejecting argument that requiring a report without allowing the deposition of the defendant doctor requires a plaintiff to make “bricks without straw”).

2009See id.; In re Miller , 133 S.W.3d 816, 818-19 (Tex. App.-Beaumont 2004, orig. proceeding) (rejecting argument that requiring a report without allowing the deposition of the defendant doctor requires a plaintiff to make "bricks without straw").

33
University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston v. Joplingreen
texapp · 2017 · cited in 2 Texas opinions naming this issue, 2022–2023
2 sentences

2023Rinkle, 658 S.W.3d at 827 n.5 (citing Joplin, 525 S.W.3d at 782 (“The statute contains no exception based on the purported unprofessional conduct of opposing counsel or the alleged failure of opposing counsel to point out a service mistake.”)).

2022See Joplin, 525 S.W.3d at 782 (“The statute contains no exception based on the purported unprofessional conduct of opposing counsel or the alleged failure of opposing counsel to point out a service mistake.”). 9 date for objections.

22
Barr v. City of Sintongreen
tex · 2009 · cited in 1 Texas opinions naming this issue, 2026–2026
1 sentence

2026“A person’s religious exercise has been substantially burdened under the [TRFRA] when his ability to express adherence to his faith through a particular religiously-motivated act has been meaningfully curtailed[.]” Barr v. City of Sinton, 295 S.W.3d 287, 302 (Tex. 2009).

11
Marshall v. Stategreen
texcrimapp · 2016 · cited in 1 Texas opinions naming this issue, 2025–2025
1 sentence

2025See Marshal v. State, 479 S.W.3d 840, 845 (Tex. 2016) (upholding conviction where defendant used pillow to impede breathing).

11
Geoffrey Dugger v. Mary Ann Arredondo, Individually and as Representative of the Estate of Joel Martinezgreen
tex · 2013 · cited in 1 Texas opinions naming this issue, 2019–2019
1 sentence

2019See Dugger v. Arredondo, 408 S.W.3d 825, 832 (Tex. 2013) (“When the Legislature intends an exception to Chapter 33’s broad scheme, it creates specific exceptions for matters that are outside the scope of proportionate responsibility.”).

11
Helton v. Railroad Com'n of Texasgreen
texapp · 2003 · cited in 1 Texas opinions naming this issue, 2011–2011
1 sentence

2011Comm’n of Tex. , 126 S.W. 3d 111, 119-20 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2003, pet. denied). [2] The statute contains an exception relating to gross negligence claims that is not implicated here. [3] Section 406.123 provides in part: (a) A general contractor and a subcontractor may enter into a written agreement under which the general contractor provides workers’ compensation insurance coverage to the subcontractor and the employees of the subcontractor. . . . (e) An agreement under this section makes the general contractor the employer of the subcontractor and the subcontractor’s employees on

11
Nguyen v. Kimgreen
texapp · 1999 · cited in 1 Texas opinions naming this issue, 2003–2003
1 sentence

2003The statute contains no such requirement, and notifying opposing counsel of their statutory obligations is nothing more than a “professional courtesy.” Nguyen, 3 S.W.3d at 153-54 (noting that “[n]ot every opposing counsel extends the professional courtesy of sending a reminder letter to the claimants’ counsel, pointing out an approaching deadline and citing to the applicable statute that mandates the filing”). y Due Process Finally, the Gutierrezes contend that denial of a grace period in the absence of conscious indifference or some notice of noncompliance would violate the due process clause

11

Distinguished, questioned or overruled (0)

CaseNegativeCited
No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Texas. Read the followed side critically anyway.

Also cited on this issue (3)

CaseCitedYears
Newspaper Holdings, Inc. v. Crazy Hotel Assisted Living, Ltd. green
texapp · 2013
1 sentence

2015As the supreme court explained in reversing and remanding this case, the primary goal of statutory construction is “to give effect to the Legislature’s intent, which requires us to first look to the statute’s plain language.”75 The Court went on to hold that the TCPA does not require speech to be publicly communicated, because the plain 72 Id. at *1. 73 Id. at *6. 74 Id. (citing Newspaper Holdings, 416 S.W.3d at 88–89). 75 Lippincott, 2015 WL 1967025, at *1 . 24 language of the statute contains no such requirement.

12015–2015
Matthew Lippincott and Creg Parks v. Warren Whisenhunt green
tex · 2015
1 sentence

2015As the supreme court explained in reversing and remanding this case, the primary goal of statutory construction is “to give effect to the Legislature’s intent, which requires us to first look to the statute’s plain language.”75 The Court went on to hold that the TCPA does not require speech to be publicly communicated, because the plain 72 Id. at *1. 73 Id. at *6. 74 Id. (citing Newspaper Holdings, 416 S.W.3d at 88–89). 75 Lippincott, 2015 WL 1967025, at *1 . 24 language of the statute contains no such requirement.

12015–2015
Brinkley v. Harkins green
tex · 1877
1 sentence

1922In the latter case the statute contains no requirement that the facts showing the election and qualification shall be a part of the record of each case tried by that judge, although they are required to be entered on the minutes of the court. * * * Properly the record should in all cases show how the special judge had authority to act; but we are not of the opinion that a party who has, without objection, participated in a trial before one purporting to be special judge, but not purporting to be so by agreement of parties, or by appointment for the special case, can afterwards be heard to obje

11922–1922

Where else courts name it

CA 33 (1954–2023) NY 23 (1914–2023) TX 16 (1922–2026) IL 15 (1897–2025) OH 13 (1969–2026) FL 12 (1918–2017) MI 11 (1929–2019) IN 11 (1927–2016) LA 8 (1981–2018) PA 6 (1976–2015) IA 5 (2014–2021) NE 5 (1927–2021) KS 5 (1940–2021) WA 5 (1969–2003) CT 5 (1990–2011) GA 4 (1946–2013) TN 4 (2000–2024) WI 4 (1927–2019) NC 4 (1906–2026) CO 4 (1957–2025) AZ 3 (2002–2012) NH 3 (1995–2025) VA 3 (1978–2002) DC 3 (1999–2021) MD 2 (1914–1922) AK 2 (2014–2014) NJ 2 (1991–2024) MA 2 (1937–2015) MS 2 (2015–2016) SC 2 (1911–2026) MN 2 (2013–2016)

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.

← Caselaw search · G Cite Topics · Brief Check