de minimis doctrine in Texas

15 Texas opinions name it 2 courts 1952–2023 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.

Followed or applied (8)

Case	Followed	Cited
Uri, Inc. v. Kleberg Cnty.green tex · 2018 · cited in 1 Texas opinions naming this issue, 2023–2023 1 sentence 2023If we’re getting into something that addresses what I would refer to as a de minimis kind of effect, that’s for another day, that’s for another case.” As we need not reach the issue of whether a 30-hour delay falls within a de minimis exception, we agree with MRC’s counsel that this question is “for another day [and] for another case.” 48 See URI, Inc. v. Kleberg County, 543 S.W.3d 755, 764 (Tex. 2018) (“[O]ur quest is to determine, objectively, what an ordinary person using those words under the circumstances in which they are used would understand them to mean.”). 49 Endeavor Energy Res., L.	1	1
Tony Gullo Motors I, L.P. and Brien Garcia v. Nury Chapagreen tex · 2006 · cited in 1 Texas opinions naming this issue, 2013–2013 1 sentence 2013See Chapa, 212 S.W.3d at 314 ; A.G.	1	1
Morris v. Powellgreen ca5 · 2006 · cited in 1 Texas opinions naming this issue, 2011–2011 1 sentence 2011Morris v. Powell, 449 F.3d 682, 686 (5th Cir. 2006) (adopting the de minimis standard in retaliation claims because it achieves proper balance between the need to recognize valid retaliation claims and danger of courts ―embroiling themselves in every disciplinary act that occurs in state penal institutions‖).	1	1
Lohrmann v. Pittsburgh Corning Corp.green ca4 · 1986 · cited in 1 Texas opinions naming this issue, 2007–2007 1 sentence 2007Lohrmann, 782 F.2d at 1162; Union Pump, 898 S.W.2d at 775 .	1	1
Yates Ford, Inc. v. Ramirezgreen tex · 1985 · cited in 1 Texas opinions naming this issue, 2006–2006 1 sentence 2006See, e.g., Yates Ford, Inc. v. Ramirez, 692 S.W.2d 51, 55 (Tex.1985) (applying the de minimis doctrine to overcharges in a consumer credit case).	1	1
Lundquist Buick-Opel, Inc. v. Wikoffgreen texapp · 1983 · cited in 1 Texas opinions naming this issue, 1984–1984 1 sentence 1984For cases denying recovery, see, Thornhill v. Sharpstown Dodge Sales, Inc., 546 S.W.2d 151 (Tex.Civ.App. — Beaumont 1976, no writ); see also Lundquist Buick-Opel, Inc. v. Wikoff, 659 S.W.2d 466 (Tex.App. — Corpus Christi 1983, writ ref’d n.r.e.); Hight v. Jim Bass Ford, Inc., 552 S.W.2d 490 (Tex.Civ.App. — Austin 1977, writ ref’d n.r.e.).	1	1
Fort Worth Neuropsychiatric Hospital, Inc. v. Bee Jay Corp.green texapp · 1979 · cited in 1 Texas opinions naming this issue, 1982–1982 1 sentence 1982In a discussion of the de minimis doctrine in Fort Worth Neuropsychiatric Hospital, Inc. v. Bee Jay Corp., 587 S.W.2d 746, 757 (Tex.Civ.App.—Fort Worth 1979, no writ) the court held in its review of a fraud case that “We certainly are ready to treat some amount of loss which is a mere trifle — for example a matter of a few dollars, or property right which measured in money could only amount to such — as insufficient result of fraud to authorize a court to refuse to honor the Statute of Frauds.” In the case before us, the appellant lost a sale of $4.00 which he arranged in order to demonstrate	1	1
Perkins v. Raittgreen me · 1857 · cited in 1 Texas opinions naming this issue, 1970–1970 1 sentence 1970See Annotation in 44 A.L.R., p. 68, Perkins v. Raitt, 43 Me. 280 ; Kelton v. Saylor, 211 Ky. 739 , 277 S.W. 1026 (1925); Whittaker v. Stangvick, 100 Minn. 386 , 111 N.W. 295 (1907); Mulrein v. Weisbecker, 37 App.Div. 545 , 56 N.Y.S. 240 (1899).	1	1

Distinguished, questioned or overruled (0)

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

Also cited on this issue (15)

Case	Cited	Years
Hightower v. State green texcrimapp · 1991 2 sentences 1999Hightower, 822 S.W.2d at 52 . 1994Hightower, 822 S.W.2d at 52 .	2	1994–1999
Thornhill v. Sharpstown Dodge Sales, Inc. green texapp · 1976 2 sentences 1985Gawlik v. Padre Staples Auto Mart, Inc., 666 S.W.2d 161 (Tex.App.Corpus Christi 1983, writ ref'd n.r.e.) (overcharge of $1.62); Wayne Strand Pontiac-GMC v. 55 Molina, 653 S.W.2d 45 (Tex.Civ.App.Corpus Christi 1983, writ ref'd n.r.e.) ($5.53 overcharge for license fee); Starness v. Guaranty Bank, 634 S.W.2d 325 (Tex.App. Dallas 1982, writ ref'd n.r.e.) (overcharge of $7.56 over 36 months); Thornhill v. Sharpstown Dodge Sales, Inc., 546 S.W.2d 151 (Tex.Civ.App.Beaumont 1976, no writ) (overcharge of $.42 over 42 months). 1985*Gawlik v. Padre Staples Auto Mart, Inc., 666 S.W.2d 161 (Tex.App.—Corpus Christi 1983, writ ref’d n.r.e.) (overcharge of $1.62); Wayne Strand Pontiac-GMC v. Molina, 653 S.W.2d 45 (Tex.Civ.App.—Corpus Christi 1983, writ ref’d n.r.e.) ($5.53 overcharge for license fee); Starness v. Guaranty Bank, 634 S.W.2d 325 (Tex.App.—Dallas 1982, writ ref’d n.r.e.) (overcharge of $7.56 over 36 months); Thornhill v. Sharpstown Dodge Sales, Inc., 546 S.W.2d 151 (Tex.Civ.App.—Beaumont 1976, no writ) (overcharge of $.42 over 42 months).	2	1984–1985
Myan Management Group, L.L.C. v. Adam Sparks Family Revocable Trust green texapp · 2009 1 sentence 2021It failed to do so. 24 Finally, TLC cites Myan Management Group, L.L.C. v. Adam Sparks Family Revocable Trust, 292 S.W.3d 750 (Tex. App.—Dallas 2009, no pet.), to argue that even if there is an inherent conflict, “it is, at most, a de minimis error or technicality that does not invalidate service.”* But Myan Management Group is distinguishable.	1	2021–2021
Claude E. Woods v. Larry Smith green ca5 · 1995 1 sentence 2011The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals has called the burden placed upon the inmate to establish retaliation ―significant.‖ Woods, 60 F.3d at 1166 .	1	2011–2011
Union Pump Co. v. Allbritton red tex · 1995 1 sentence 2007Lohrmann, 782 F.2d at 1162; Union Pump, 898 S.W.2d at 775 .	1	2007–2007
Starness v. Guaranty Bank neutral texapp · 1982 2 sentences 1985Gawlik v. Padre Staples Auto Mart, Inc., 666 S.W.2d 161 (Tex.App.Corpus Christi 1983, writ ref'd n.r.e.) (overcharge of $1.62); Wayne Strand Pontiac-GMC v. 55 Molina, 653 S.W.2d 45 (Tex.Civ.App.Corpus Christi 1983, writ ref'd n.r.e.) ($5.53 overcharge for license fee); Starness v. Guaranty Bank, 634 S.W.2d 325 (Tex.App. Dallas 1982, writ ref'd n.r.e.) (overcharge of $7.56 over 36 months); Thornhill v. Sharpstown Dodge Sales, Inc., 546 S.W.2d 151 (Tex.Civ.App.Beaumont 1976, no writ) (overcharge of $.42 over 42 months). 1985*Gawlik v. Padre Staples Auto Mart, Inc., 666 S.W.2d 161 (Tex.App.—Corpus Christi 1983, writ ref’d n.r.e.) (overcharge of $1.62); Wayne Strand Pontiac-GMC v. Molina, 653 S.W.2d 45 (Tex.Civ.App.—Corpus Christi 1983, writ ref’d n.r.e.) ($5.53 overcharge for license fee); Starness v. Guaranty Bank, 634 S.W.2d 325 (Tex.App.—Dallas 1982, writ ref’d n.r.e.) (overcharge of $7.56 over 36 months); Thornhill v. Sharpstown Dodge Sales, Inc., 546 S.W.2d 151 (Tex.Civ.App.—Beaumont 1976, no writ) (overcharge of $.42 over 42 months).	1	1985–1985
Gawlik v. Padre Staples Auto Mart, Inc. neutral texapp · 1983 2 sentences 1985Gawlik v. Padre Staples Auto Mart, Inc., 666 S.W.2d 161 (Tex.App.Corpus Christi 1983, writ ref'd n.r.e.) (overcharge of $1.62); Wayne Strand Pontiac-GMC v. 55 Molina, 653 S.W.2d 45 (Tex.Civ.App.Corpus Christi 1983, writ ref'd n.r.e.) ($5.53 overcharge for license fee); Starness v. Guaranty Bank, 634 S.W.2d 325 (Tex.App. Dallas 1982, writ ref'd n.r.e.) (overcharge of $7.56 over 36 months); Thornhill v. Sharpstown Dodge Sales, Inc., 546 S.W.2d 151 (Tex.Civ.App.Beaumont 1976, no writ) (overcharge of $.42 over 42 months). 1985*Gawlik v. Padre Staples Auto Mart, Inc., 666 S.W.2d 161 (Tex.App.—Corpus Christi 1983, writ ref’d n.r.e.) (overcharge of $1.62); Wayne Strand Pontiac-GMC v. Molina, 653 S.W.2d 45 (Tex.Civ.App.—Corpus Christi 1983, writ ref’d n.r.e.) ($5.53 overcharge for license fee); Starness v. Guaranty Bank, 634 S.W.2d 325 (Tex.App.—Dallas 1982, writ ref’d n.r.e.) (overcharge of $7.56 over 36 months); Thornhill v. Sharpstown Dodge Sales, Inc., 546 S.W.2d 151 (Tex.Civ.App.—Beaumont 1976, no writ) (overcharge of $.42 over 42 months).	1	1985–1985
Wayne Strand Pontiac-GMC v. Molina green texapp · 1983 2 sentences 1985Gawlik v. Padre Staples Auto Mart, Inc., 666 S.W.2d 161 (Tex.App.Corpus Christi 1983, writ ref'd n.r.e.) (overcharge of $1.62); Wayne Strand Pontiac-GMC v. 55 Molina, 653 S.W.2d 45 (Tex.Civ.App.Corpus Christi 1983, writ ref'd n.r.e.) ($5.53 overcharge for license fee); Starness v. Guaranty Bank, 634 S.W.2d 325 (Tex.App. Dallas 1982, writ ref'd n.r.e.) (overcharge of $7.56 over 36 months); Thornhill v. Sharpstown Dodge Sales, Inc., 546 S.W.2d 151 (Tex.Civ.App.Beaumont 1976, no writ) (overcharge of $.42 over 42 months). 1985*Gawlik v. Padre Staples Auto Mart, Inc., 666 S.W.2d 161 (Tex.App.—Corpus Christi 1983, writ ref’d n.r.e.) (overcharge of $1.62); Wayne Strand Pontiac-GMC v. Molina, 653 S.W.2d 45 (Tex.Civ.App.—Corpus Christi 1983, writ ref’d n.r.e.) ($5.53 overcharge for license fee); Starness v. Guaranty Bank, 634 S.W.2d 325 (Tex.App.—Dallas 1982, writ ref’d n.r.e.) (overcharge of $7.56 over 36 months); Thornhill v. Sharpstown Dodge Sales, Inc., 546 S.W.2d 151 (Tex.Civ.App.—Beaumont 1976, no writ) (overcharge of $.42 over 42 months).	1	1985–1985
Hight v. Jim Bass Ford, Inc. green texapp · 1977 1 sentence 1984For cases denying recovery, see, Thornhill v. Sharpstown Dodge Sales, Inc., 546 S.W.2d 151 (Tex.Civ.App. — Beaumont 1976, no writ); see also Lundquist Buick-Opel, Inc. v. Wikoff, 659 S.W.2d 466 (Tex.App. — Corpus Christi 1983, writ ref’d n.r.e.); Hight v. Jim Bass Ford, Inc., 552 S.W.2d 490 (Tex.Civ.App. — Austin 1977, writ ref’d n.r.e.).	1	1984–1984
Peightal v. Cotton States Building Co. green texapp · 1901 2 sentences 1982Co., 25 Tex.Civ.App. 390 , 61 S.W. 428 (San Antonio 1901, no writ) as support for his proposition that the de minimis doctrine should not apply in those cases where interest exceeded more than double the legal rate. 1982Co., 25 Tex.Civ.App. 390 , 61 S.W. 428 (San Antonio 1901, no writ) as support for his proposition that the de minimis doctrine should not apply in those cases where interest exceeded more than double the legal rate.	1	1982–1982
Whittaker v. Stangvick green minn · 1907 2 sentences 1970See Annotation in 44 A.L.R., p. 68, Perkins v. Raitt, 43 Me. 280 ; Kelton v. Saylor, 211 Ky. 739 , 277 S.W. 1026 (1925); Whittaker v. Stangvick, 100 Minn. 386 , 111 N.W. 295 (1907); Mulrein v. Weisbecker, 37 App.Div. 545 , 56 N.Y.S. 240 (1899). 1970See Annotation in 44 A.L.R., p. 68, Perkins v. Raitt, 43 Me. 280 ; Kelton v. Saylor, 211 Ky. 739 , 277 S.W. 1026 (1925); Whittaker v. Stangvick, 100 Minn. 386 , 111 N.W. 295 (1907); Mulrein v. Weisbecker, 37 App.Div. 545 , 56 N.Y.S. 240 (1899).	1	1970–1970
Kelton v. Saylor green kyctapphigh · 1925 2 sentences 1970See Annotation in 44 A.L.R., p. 68, Perkins v. Raitt, 43 Me. 280 ; Kelton v. Saylor, 211 Ky. 739 , 277 S.W. 1026 (1925); Whittaker v. Stangvick, 100 Minn. 386 , 111 N.W. 295 (1907); Mulrein v. Weisbecker, 37 App.Div. 545 , 56 N.Y.S. 240 (1899). 1970See Annotation in 44 A.L.R., p. 68, Perkins v. Raitt, 43 Me. 280 ; Kelton v. Saylor, 211 Ky. 739 , 277 S.W. 1026 (1925); Whittaker v. Stangvick, 100 Minn. 386 , 111 N.W. 295 (1907); Mulrein v. Weisbecker, 37 App.Div. 545 , 56 N.Y.S. 240 (1899).	1	1970–1970
Mulrein v. Weisbecker neutral nyappdiv · 1899 2 sentences 1970See Annotation in 44 A.L.R., p. 68, Perkins v. Raitt, 43 Me. 280 ; Kelton v. Saylor, 211 Ky. 739 , 277 S.W. 1026 (1925); Whittaker v. Stangvick, 100 Minn. 386 , 111 N.W. 295 (1907); Mulrein v. Weisbecker, 37 App.Div. 545 , 56 N.Y.S. 240 (1899). 1970See Annotation in 44 A.L.R., p. 68, Perkins v. Raitt, 43 Me. 280 ; Kelton v. Saylor, 211 Ky. 739 , 277 S.W. 1026 (1925); Whittaker v. Stangvick, 100 Minn. 386 , 111 N.W. 295 (1907); Mulrein v. Weisbecker, 37 App.Div. 545 , 56 N.Y.S. 240 (1899).	1	1970–1970
cluster 274029 green ca5 · 1966 2 sentences 1969In Pyramid Motor Freight Corp. v. Ispass, supra, the U. S. Supreme Court held that the activities of an employee of an interstate carrier may form “so trivial, casual or occasional a part of an employee’s activities, or his activities may relate only to such articles or to such limited handling of them, that his activities will not come within the kind of ‘loading’ which is described by the Commission and which, in its opinion, affects safety of operation.” In the case of Wirtz v. Tyler Pipe and Foundry Co., 369 F.2d 927 (5th Cir., 1966) the employee was held non-exempt from overtime provision 1969In Pyramid Motor Freight Corp. v. Ispass, supra, the U. S. Supreme Court held that the activities of an employee of an interstate carrier may form “so trivial, casual or occasional a part of an employee’s activities, or his activities may relate only to such articles or to such limited handling of them, that his activities will not come within the kind of ‘loading’ which is described by the Commission and which, in its opinion, affects safety of operation.” In the case of Wirtz v. Tyler Pipe and Foundry Co., 369 F.2d 927 (5th Cir., 1966) the employee was held non-exempt from overtime provision	1	1969–1969
Reid v. Ramsey green texapp · 1940 1 sentence 1952The amounts testified to were, “about $75, $60 to $75.” For a discussion of the doctrine, see 12 Words and Phrases, De Minimis Non Curat Lex, p. 31, and pocket part on the same phrase; also Love v. Spur Independent School District, Tex.Civ.App., 143 S.W.2d 793 , and cases there cited.	1	1952–1952

Where else courts name it

PA 61 (1959–2026) IL 53 (1968–2026) OH 52 (2000–2026) CA 24 (1949–2023) WA 23 (2000–2026) NY 21 (1953–2025) TX 15 (1952–2023) NJ 13 (1980–2022) HI 12 (2000–2023) VT 10 (1976–2026) MA 10 (1958–2016) NC 9 (1943–2020) IN 7 (1971–2025) CT 7 (1998–2026) MN 6 (2002–2023) AR 6 (1951–2008) NM 6 (1994–2026) MO 6 (1984–2024) MD 5 (1982–2026) WI 5 (2000–2025) ND 5 (2004–2015) IA 4 (1972–1994) FL 4 (2003–2024) MS 4 (2004–2013) UT 4 (1995–2013) MI 3 (1955–2023) DC 3 (1990–2009) ME 3 (2003–2023) RI 3 (2004–2011) DE 2 (2019–2021) OR 2 (2006–2024) TN 2 (1956–1988) ID 2 (2022–2022)

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