below error (Texas) · Go Syfert
← Texas issues

below error in Texas

14 Texas opinions name it 2 courts 1864–2015 0 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 (3)

CaseFollowedCited
Baker v. Hansengreen
tex · 1984 · cited in 9 Texas opinions naming this issue, 2002–2015
2 sentences

2012“With ‘jurisdictional-based’ fundamental-error review, an appellate court may reverse the judgment of the court below for error—without conducting a review for harm—even if the error is not preserved.” In re J.F.C., 96 S.W.3d at 291 (O’Neill, J., dissenting) (citing Baker v. Hansen, 679 S.W.2d 480, 481 (Tex. 1984)).

2012Underwriters, Inc., 157 Tex. 475 , 304 S.W.2d 265, 266 (1957); see also In re J.F.C., 96 S.W.3d 256, 290-92 (Tex.2002) (O’Neill, J., dissenting) (discussing fundamental-error doctrine). ‘With ‘jurisdictional-based’ fundamental— error review, an appellate court may reverse the judgment of the court below for error-without conducting a review for harm — even if the error is not preserved.” In re J.F.C., 96 S.W.3d at 291 (O’Neill, J., dissenting) (citing Baker v. Hansen, 679 S.W.2d 480, 481 (Tex.1984)).

99
In Re JFCgreen
tex · 2002 · cited in 3 Texas opinions naming this issue, 2012–2012
2 sentences

2012Underwriters, Inc., 157 Tex. 475 , 304 S.W.2d 265, 266 (1957); see also In re J.F.C., 96 S.W.3d 256, 290-92 (Tex.2002) (O’Neill, J., dissenting) (discussing fundamental-error doctrine). ‘With ‘jurisdictional-based’ fundamental— error review, an appellate court may reverse the judgment of the court below for error-without conducting a review for harm — even if the error is not preserved.” In re J.F.C., 96 S.W.3d at 291 (O’Neill, J., dissenting) (citing Baker v. Hansen, 679 S.W.2d 480, 481 (Tex.1984)).

2012Underwriters, Inc., 157 Tex. 475 , 304 S.W.2d 265, 266 (1957); see also In re J.F.C., 96 S.W.3d 256, 290-92 (Tex.2002) (O’Neill, J., dissenting) (discussing fundamental-error doctrine). ‘With ‘jurisdictional-based’ fundamental— error review, an appellate court may reverse the judgment of the court below for error-without conducting a review for harm — even if the error is not preserved.” In re J.F.C., 96 S.W.3d at 291 (O’Neill, J., dissenting) (citing Baker v. Hansen, 679 S.W.2d 480, 481 (Tex.1984)).

33
McCauley v. Consolidated Underwritersgreen
tex · 1957 · cited in 1 Texas opinions naming this issue, 2012–2012
2 sentences

2012Underwriters, Inc., 157 Tex. 475 , 304 S.W.2d 265, 266 (1957); see also In re J.F.C., 96 S.W.3d 256, 290-92 (Tex.2002) (O’Neill, J., dissenting) (discussing fundamental-error doctrine). ‘With ‘jurisdictional-based’ fundamental— error review, an appellate court may reverse the judgment of the court below for error-without conducting a review for harm — even if the error is not preserved.” In re J.F.C., 96 S.W.3d at 291 (O’Neill, J., dissenting) (citing Baker v. Hansen, 679 S.W.2d 480, 481 (Tex.1984)).

2012Underwriters, Inc., 157 Tex. 475 , 304 S.W.2d 265, 266 (1957); see also In re J.F.C., 96 S.W.3d 256, 290-92 (Tex.2002) (O’Neill, J., dissenting) (discussing fundamental-error doctrine). ‘With ‘jurisdictional-based’ fundamental— error review, an appellate court may reverse the judgment of the court below for error-without conducting a review for harm — even if the error is not preserved.” In re J.F.C., 96 S.W.3d at 291 (O’Neill, J., dissenting) (citing Baker v. Hansen, 679 S.W.2d 480, 481 (Tex.1984)).

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 (5)

CaseCitedYears
Bowie Memorial Hospital v. Wright green
tex · 2002
1 sentence

2011The standard of care for a post-operative kidney transplant patient is to have a blood assessment, at the very minimum, every six hours, post-operatively, which 4 Hypovolemic means having “a decreased amount of blood in the body.” Id. at 939 . 9 would include a basic metabolic panel.

12011–2011
Fitz-Gerald v. Hull green
tex · 1951
1 sentence

1957Quoting Judge Griffin again in Fitz-Gerald v. Hull, in his reference to Art. 7425b-2 he says [ 150 Tex. 39 , 237 S.W.2d 259 ]: “The only purpose the Legislature could possibly have had in thus amend *730 ing Sec. 2, was to make more definite just what trusts were covered by the Act, and to state in so many words that the Act was not meant to apply to resulting or constructive trusts * * Admittedly, Wilson and Therrell were joint adventurers in the promotion of the oil assignment.

11957–1957
Gardner v. Wesner green
texapp · 1932
1 sentence

1946Gardner v. Wesner, Tex.Civ.App., 55 S.W. 2d 1104 ; Morris Plan Bank of Ft.

11946–1946
Sutton v. State green
tex · 1874
1 sentence

1876Our supreme court, in the case of Sutton v. The State, 41 Texas, 513 , says : “ In cases of felony we are not restricted to the assignment of errors.

11876–1876
Patrick v. Roach neutral
tex · 1858
1 sentence

1864It was settled when this case was before this court on a former appeal, ( 21 Tex., 251 ,) that the plaintiff in the court below could only claim damages for the use and occupation of the premises subsequent to the 22d of April, 1856, the date of the recision of the contract under which John M.

11864–1864

Statutes the citing opinions construe

TX § Tex. Fam. Code § 161.001 (6) TX § Tex. Fam. Code § 101.007 (5) TX § Tex. Fam. Code § 107.013 (5) TX § Tex. Fam. Code § 107.103 (5) TX § Tex. Fam. Code § 109.002 (5) TX § Tex. Fam. Code § 153.001 (5) TX § Tex. Fam. Code § 262.104 (5) TX § Tex. Fam. Code § 262.105 (5) TX § Tex. Fam. Code § 262.201 (5) TX § Tex. Fam. Code § 51.11 (5) TX § Tex. Fam. Code § 263.405 (4) TX § Tex. Fam. Code § 161.206 (3)

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.

Where else courts name it

PA 71 (1890–2022) CA 19 (1881–2022) NY 18 (1868–1985) TX 14 (1864–2015) WA 14 (1890–2022) NC 12 (1928–1980) IL 11 (1918–2025) AL 10 (1866–1983) FL 9 (1902–2005) TN 9 (1903–1970) GA 9 (1882–2008) MI 7 (1891–1917) VT 7 (1918–2006) IN 6 (1881–2015) AR 6 (1879–1964) OH 5 (1917–2023) MS 5 (1893–1970) LA 4 (1936–1960) MN 4 (1945–1976) UT 4 (1933–1940) KS 4 (1898–1964) MO 4 (1905–1999) CT 3 (1966–1971) MD 3 (1911–2011) VA 3 (1876–1876) NJ 3 (1880–1974) NM 3 (1898–1964) WV 2 (1917–1963) HI 2 (1964–1966) IA 2 (1864–1887) KY 2 (1923–1926)

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