13 Texas opinions name it 4 courts 1936–2024 1 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 |
|---|---|---|
Wood County v. Categreen1 sentence2019See, e.g., Wood Cty. v. Cate, 12 S.W. 535, 536 (Tex. 1889) (“To give that statute such enlarged application would violate established rules for the construction of statutes penal in their nature.”). | 1 | 1 |
Potier v. Stategreen1 sentence2015See id. | 1 | 1 |
Palafox v. Silveygreen1 sentence2015See, e.g., Palafox v. Silvey, 247 S.W.3d 310, 315, 319 (Tex. App.—El Paso 2007, no pet.) (noting that a doctor in a different field was qualified to provide an expert report on the standard of care involved in charting the dietary needs of elderly patients when the alleged injury involved an elderly patient who choked after being placed on a regular diet at the hospital). | 1 | 1 |
Albright v. Texas Department of Human Servicesgreen2 sentences2001See Albright v. Tex. Dep’t of Human Se rvs., 859 S.W.2d 575 , 579 n. 1 (Tex.App.— Houston [1st Dist.] 1993, no writ) (citing Tex. Civ. 2001See Albright v. Tex. Dep't of Human Servs., 859 S.W.2d 575 , 579 n. 1 (Tex. App.-Houston [1st Dist.] 1993, no writ) (citing Tex. Civ. | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
Reinhart v. Younggreen1 sentence2005But see Reinhart, 906 S.W.2d at 477 (Enoch, J., concurring) (opining that the unavoidable-accident instruction should be discarded); (Hightower, J., dissenting) (same). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Carl J. Battaglia, M.D., P.A. v. Alexander
green
2 sentences2008Instead, appellants claim the trial court did what the Texas Supreme Court told it not to do in Battaglia , 177 S.W.3d at 899—peer outside the four corners of an expert report and rely on extrinsic data to find the standard of care and causation. 2008Instead, appellants claim the trial court did what the Texas Supreme Court told it not to do in Battaglia , 177 S.W.3d at 899 C peer outside the four corners of an expert report and rely on extrinsic data to find the standard of care and causation. | 2 | 2008–2008 |
Von Moltke v. Gillies
green
2 sentences2000There, the court indicated that a waiver of the right to counsel must be made by the defendant with an apprehension of the nature of the offense, range of punishment, and "possible defenses to the charges and circumstances in mitigation thereof." Von Moltke , 332 U.S. at 723 . 2000There, the court indicated that a waiver of the right to counsel must be made by the defendant with an apprehension of the nature of the offense, range of punishment, and “possible defenses to the charges and circumstances in mitigation thereof.” Von Moltke, 332 U. S. at 723 . | 2 | 2000–2000 |
Fuller v. State
green
1 sentence2024App. 2012), which “stands for the proposition that: (1) the topic of ‘beyond a reasonable doubt’ is a proper area of inquiry; and (2) discussion of the different standards’ requirements relative to each other is proper, thus allowing a party to explore the jury’s understanding of the standard as being ‘at least [ ] a more onerous standard of proof than preponderance of the evidence and clear and convincing evidence.’” In re Commitment of Fletcher, 658 S.W.3d 834 , 846 (Tex. App.—El Paso 2022, no pet.) (quoting Fuller, 363 S.W.3d at 587 ) (emphasis in original). | 1 | 2024–2024 |
Almanza v. State
green
2 sentences1988In the two short years since the advent of the understanding of error in jury instructions elucidated in Almanza v. State, 686 S.W.2d 157 (Tex.Cr.App.1985) (opinion on rehearing), over three hundred reported cases have used the two-tiered analysis in jury charge error. 1988In the two short years since the advent of the understanding of error in jury instructions elucidated in Almanza v. State, 686 S.W.2d 157 (Tex.Cr.App.1985) (opinion on rehearing), over three hundred reported cases have used the two-tiered analysis in jury charge error. | 1 | 1988–1988 |
Lipshy v. Lipshy
green
1 sentence1979The writer’s understanding of the rule of Perkins v. Freeman is set out by the Dallas Court of Civil Appeals in Lipshy v. Lipshy, 525 S.W.2d 222 (1975, writ dism’d). | 1 | 1979–1979 |
Genovese v. Butt
green
1 sentence1936In applying them the ordinary experience, usages, and habits of men are to be taken into consideration, and authority to use force will not be implied when the business intrusted to the agent is such that use of force is not a natural or ordinary means or incident of transacting it.” The Supreme Court is committed to such an understanding of the rule by adoption of the opinion of the Commission of Appeals in Genovese v. Butt (Tex.Com.App.) 48 S.W.(2d) 587 . | 1 | 1936–1936 |
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.