sound rule in Texas

1919Legislation, on the other hand, loolcs to the future and changes existing conditions by making a new rule to he applied thereafter to all or some part of those subject to its power. * * * ” (Italics ours.) Judge Stayton, in Mellinger v. City of Houston, 68 Tex. 37 , 3 S. W. 249 , says: “In the absence of constitutional restrictions upon the subject, it is almost universally accepted as a sound rule of construction that a statute shall have only a prospective operation, unless its terms show clearly a legislative intention that it shall have a retroactive effect.

1919Legislation, on the other hand, loolcs to the future and changes existing conditions by making a new rule to he applied thereafter to all or some part of those subject to its power. * * * ” (Italics ours.) Judge Stayton, in Mellinger v. City of Houston, 68 Tex. 37 , 3 S. W. 249 , says: “In the absence of constitutional restrictions upon the subject, it is almost universally accepted as a sound rule of construction that a statute shall have only a prospective operation, unless its terms show clearly a legislative intention that it shall have a retroactive effect.

2020Whether to expel a graduate student under this general statutory authorization, in good faith and while respecting due process, was an “academic decision”: “‘[W]hen courts review the substance of academic decisions . . . they should show great respect for the teacher’s professional judgment.’ This sound rule is based on the belief that university administrators, not judges, should make academic decisions needed to run a university.” Alcorn, 877 S.W.2d at 397 (internal citation omitted) (quoting Clements v. County of Nassau, 835 F.2d 1000, 1005 (2d Cir. 1987)); see also Mahavongsanan v. Hall, 5

2020The determination whether to dismiss the student under this generalized statutory authorization, in good faith and while respecting due process, was an “academic decision”: “‘[W]hen courts review the substance of academic decisions . . . they should show great respect for the teacher’s professional judgment.’ This sound rule is based on the belief that university administrators, not judges, should make academic decisions needed to run a university.” Alcorn, 877 S.W.2d at 397 (internal citation omitted) (quoting Clements v. County of Nassau, 835 F.2d 1000, 1005 (2d Cir. 1987)); see also Mahavon

2020Whether to expel a graduate student under this general statutory authorization, in good faith and while respecting due process, was an “academic decision”: “‘[W]hen courts review the substance of academic decisions . . . they should show great respect for the teacher’s professional judgment.’ This sound rule is based on the belief that university administrators, not judges, should make academic decisions needed to run a university.” Alcorn, 877 S.W.2d at 397 (internal citation omitted) (quoting Clements v. County of Nassau, 835 F.2d 1000, 1005 (2d Cir. 1987)); see also Mahavongsanan v. Hall, 5

2020The determination whether to dismiss the student under this generalized statutory authorization, in good faith and while respecting due process, was an “academic decision”: “‘[W]hen courts review the substance of academic decisions . . . they should show great respect for the teacher’s professional judgment.’ This sound rule is based on the belief that university administrators, not judges, should make academic decisions needed to run a university.” Alcorn, 877 S.W.2d at 397 (internal citation omitted) (quoting Clements v. County of Nassau, 835 F.2d 1000, 1005 (2d Cir. 1987)); see also Mahavon

2020Whether to expel a graduate student under this general statutory authorization, in good faith and while respecting due process, was an “academic decision”: “‘[W]hen courts review the substance of academic decisions . . . they should show great respect for the teacher’s professional judgment.’ This sound rule is based on the belief that university administrators, not judges, should make academic decisions needed to run a university.” Alcorn, 877 S.W.2d at 397 (internal citation omitted) (quoting Clements v. County of Nassau, 835 F.2d 1000, 1005 (2d Cir. 1987)); see also Mahavongsanan v. Hall, 5

2020The determination whether to dismiss the student under this generalized statutory authorization, in good faith and while respecting due process, was an “academic decision”: “‘[W]hen courts review the substance of academic decisions . . . they should show great respect for the teacher’s professional judgment.’ This sound rule is based on the belief that university administrators, not judges, should make academic decisions needed to run a university.” Alcorn, 877 S.W.2d at 397 (internal citation omitted) (quoting Clements v. County of Nassau, 835 F.2d 1000, 1005 (2d Cir. 1987)); see also Mahavon

2001See Harrison v. United States, 392 U.S. 219, 226 , 88 S.Ct. 2008, 2012 , 20 L.Ed.2d 1047 (1968); Valcarcel v. State, 765 S.W.2d 412, 417-18 (Tex.Crim.App.1989).

2001See Harrison v. United States, 392 U.S. 219, 226 , 88 S.Ct. 2008, 2012 , 20 L.Ed.2d 1047 (1968); Valcarcel v. State, 765 S.W.2d 412, 417-18 (Tex.Crim.App.1989).

2001See Harrison v. United States, 392 U.S. 219, 226 , 88 S.Ct. 2008, 2012 , 20 L.Ed.2d 1047 (1968); Valcarcel v. State, 765 S.W.2d 412, 417-18 (Tex.Crim.App.1989).

2001See Harrison v. United States, 392 U.S. 219, 226 , 88 S.Ct. 2008, 2012 , 20 L.Ed.2d 1047 (1968); Valcarcel v. State, 765 S.W.2d 412, 417-18 (Tex.Crim.App.1989).

1978We think the Supreme Court of Tennessee announced a sound rule of law to be applied in such cases in Brumley v. Chattanooga Speedway & Motordrome Co., 138 Tenn. 534 , 198 S.W. 775, 776 (1917), when it said: `A "conspiracy to defraud" on the part of two or more persons means a common purpose, supported by a concerted action to defraud, that each has the intent to do it, and that it is common to each of them, and that each has the understanding that the other has that purpose.' [Emphasis theirs.] "The general governing rule is stated as follows: "There must be an agreement or understanding betwe

1978We think the Supreme Court of Tennessee announced a sound rule of law to be applied in such cases in Brumley v. Chattanooga Speedway & Motordrome Co., 138 Tenn. 534 , 198 S.W. 775, 776 (1917), when it said: ‘A “conspiracy to defraud” on the part of two or more persons means a common purpose, supported by a concerted action to defraud, that each has the intent to do it, and that it is common to each of them, and that each has the understanding that the other has that purpose.’ [Emphasis theirs.] “The general governing rule is stated as follows: ‘There must be an agreement or understanding betwe

2007Section 6.43 permits the review board two choices in employing legal counsel: to (1) "employ legal counsel as provided by the district budget" or (2) "use the services of the county attorney." Id.; see also id. § 6.06 (requiring chief appraiser to propose district's operational budget for approval by the district's board of directors and taxing units in the district); Cobra Oil Gas Corp. v. Sadler , 447 S.W.2d 887 , 892 (Tex. 1968) (citing "the sound principle that `where a power is granted, and the method of its exercise prescribed, the prescribed method excludes all others, and must be follo

2007Section 6.43 permits the review board two choices in employing legal counsel: to (1) "employ legal counsel as provided by the district budget" or (2) "use the services of the county attorney." Id.; see also id. 5 6.06 (requiring chief appraiser to propose district's operational budget for approval by the district's board of directors and taxing units in the district); Cobra Oil & Gas Corp. v. Sadler, 447 S.W.2d 887, 892 (Tex. 1968) (citing "the sound principle that 'where a power is granted, and the method of its exercise prescribed, the prescribed method excludes all others, and must be follo

1988That is a sound rule and should not be whittled down by exceptions.” Johnson v. Peckham, 132 Tex. 148 , 120 S.W.2d 786, 788 (1938).

1988That is a sound rule and should not be whittled down by exceptions.” Johnson v. Peckham, 132 Tex. 148 , 120 S.W.2d 786, 788 (1938).

2014See, e.g,, Bailey v. Mullens, 313 S.W.2d 99, 102 (Tex.Civ.App.-San Antonio 1958, writ ref'd n.r.e.) (“A sound rule of construction requires an interpretation under which -the deed will be valid and operative in preference to one which will nullify it.”).

1959The rule of interpretation which requires rejection of the title of an instrument when it and the body of the instrument are at war and cannot be harmonized, as was the case in Bailey v. Mullens, supra, is a sound rule.

2007Section 6.43 permits the review board two choices in employing legal counsel: to (1) "employ legal counsel as provided by the district budget" or (2) "use the services of the county attorney." Id.; see also id. § 6.06 (requiring chief appraiser to propose district's operational budget for approval by the district's board of directors and taxing units in the district); Cobra Oil Gas Corp. v. Sadler , 447 S.W.2d 887 , 892 (Tex. 1968) (citing "the sound principle that `where a power is granted, and the method of its exercise prescribed, the prescribed method excludes all others, and must be follo

2007Section 6.43 permits the review board two choices in employing legal counsel: to (1) "employ legal counsel as provided by the district budget" or (2) "use the services of the county attorney." Id.; see also id. 5 6.06 (requiring chief appraiser to propose district's operational budget for approval by the district's board of directors and taxing units in the district); Cobra Oil & Gas Corp. v. Sadler, 447 S.W.2d 887, 892 (Tex. 1968) (citing "the sound principle that 'where a power is granted, and the method of its exercise prescribed, the prescribed method excludes all others, and must be follo

2020See Cornette v. Aldridge, 408 S.W.2d 935, 937 , 940–42 (Tex. App.—Amarillo 1966, no writ) (per curiam).

2020The determination whether to dismiss the student under this generalized statutory authorization, in good faith and while respecting due process, was an “academic decision”: “‘[W]hen courts review the substance of academic decisions . . . they should show great respect for the teacher’s professional judgment.’ This sound rule is based on the belief that university administrators, not judges, should make academic decisions needed to run a university.” Alcorn, 877 S.W.2d at 397 (internal citation omitted) (quoting Clements v. County of Nassau, 835 F.2d 1000, 1005 (2d Cir. 1987)); see also Mahavon

2014With respect to property descriptions, the statute of frauds requires “a written memorandum which is complete within itself in every material'detail, and which contains all of the essential elements of the agreement, so that the contract can *12 be ascertained from the writings without resorting to oral testimony.” Cohen v. McCutchin, 565 S.W.2d 230, 232 (Tex.1978).

2007Section 6.43 permits the review board two choices in employing legal counsel: to (1) "employ legal counsel as provided by the district budget" or (2) "use the services of the county attorney." Id.; see also id. 5 6.06 (requiring chief appraiser to propose district's operational budget for approval by the district's board of directors and taxing units in the district); Cobra Oil & Gas Corp. v. Sadler, 447 S.W.2d 887, 892 (Tex. 1968) (citing "the sound principle that 'where a power is granted, and the method of its exercise prescribed, the prescribed method excludes all others, and must be follo