Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
90 Texas opinions name it 3 courts 1924–2025 17 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 |
|---|---|---|
Goode v. Shoukfehgreen2 sentences2006App. P . 44.1(a) (stating that no judgment may be reversed on appeal on the ground that the trial court made an error of law unless the court of appeals concludes that the error complained of probably caused the rendition of an improper judgment or probably prevented the appellant from properly presenting the case to the court of appeals); Goode v. Shoukfeh , 915 S.W.2d 666, 673 (Tex. App.-Amarillo 1996), affirmed , 943 S.W.2d 441 (Tex. 1997) (overruling the point of error since the appellant did not claim or attempt to show that he was harmed by the purported error). 2003P. 44.1(a) (stating that no judgment may be reversed on appeal on the ground that the trial court made an error of law unless the court of appeals concludes that the error complained of probably caused the rendition of an improper judgment or probably prevented the appellant from properly presenting the case to the court of appeals); Goode v. Shoukfeh, 915 S.W.2d 666, 673 (Tex.App.-Amarillo 1996), affirmed, 943 S.W.2d 441 (Tex.1997) (overruling the point of error since the appellant did not claim or attempt to show that he was harmed by the purported error). | 4 | 4 |
London v. Londongreen2 sentences2013See Tex.R.App. 44.1(a)(1) (stating that "[n]o judgment may be reversed on appeal on the ground that the trial court made an error of law unless the court of appeals concludes that the error complained of ....”) (emphasis added); London v. London, 342 S.W.3d 768, 776 (Tex.App.-Houston [14th Dist.] 2011, no pet.). . 2013App. 44.1 (a)(1) (stating that “[n]o judgment may be reversed on appeal on the ground that the trial court made an error of law unless the court of appeals concludes that the error complained of . . . .”) (emphasis added); London v. London, 342 S.W.3d 768, 776 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 2011, no pet.). 60 See Walker, 827 S.W.2d at 839 . 61 Id. at 839–40. 62 See id. at 840 . 63 Id. 64 Id. 65 Id. 23 Pendens,” provides in pertinent part: (a) A party to an action in connection with which a notice of lis pendens has been filed may: (1) apply to the court to expunge the notice; and (2) file evi | 3 | 3 |
Columbia Rio Grande Healthcare, L.P. v. Hawleygreen2 sentences2025“A judgment will not be reversed for 13 charge error unless the error was harmful because it probably caused the rendition of an improper verdict or probably prevented the petitioner from properly presenting the case to the appellate courts.” Knoderer, 515 S.W.3d at 41 (quoting Columbia Rio Grande Healthcare, L.P. v. Hawley, 284 S.W.3d 851, 856 (Tex. 2009)). 2023P. 44.1(a)(1) (no judgment may be reversed on the ground that the trial court made an error of law unless the appellate court concludes that the error “probably caused the rendition of an improper judgment”); Columbia Rio Grande Healthcare, L.P. v. Hawley, 284 S.W.3d 851, 856 (Tex. 2009) (“Charge error is generally considered harmful if it relates to a contested, critical issue.”). | 2 | 3 |
Walker v. Packergreen2 sentences2013App. 44.1 (a)(1) (stating that “[n]o judgment may be reversed on appeal on the ground that the trial court made an error of law unless the court of appeals concludes that the error complained of . . . .”) (emphasis added); London v. London, 342 S.W.3d 768, 776 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 2011, no pet.). 60 See Walker, 827 S.W.2d at 839 . 61 Id. at 839–40. 62 See id. at 840 . 63 Id. 64 Id. 65 Id. 23 Pendens,” provides in pertinent part: (a) A party to an action in connection with which a notice of lis pendens has been filed may: (1) apply to the court to expunge the notice; and (2) file evi 2013App. 44.1 (a)(1) (stating that “[n]o judgment may be reversed on appeal on the ground that the trial court made an error of law unless the court of appeals concludes that the error complained of . . . .”) (emphasis added); London v. London, 342 S.W.3d 768, 776 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 2011, no pet.). 60 See Walker, 827 S.W.2d at 839 . 61 Id. at 839–40. 62 See id. at 840 . 63 Id. 64 Id. 65 Id. 23 Pendens,” provides in pertinent part: (a) A party to an action in connection with which a notice of lis pendens has been filed may: (1) apply to the court to expunge the notice; and (2) file evi | 2 | 3 |
EI Du Pont De Nemours & Co. v. Robinsongreen2 sentences2005Id. (citing E.I. du Pont de Nemours & Co., Inc. v. Robinson, 923 S.W.2d 549, 558 (Tex.1995)). 2005Id . ( citing E.I. du Pont de Nemours & Co., Inc. v. Robinson , 923 S.W.2d 549, 558 (Tex. 1995)). | 2 | 3 |
In Re JITPgreen2 sentences2024P. 44.2(a) (providing that, in civil cases, “[n]o judgment may be reversed on appeal on the ground that the trial court made an error of law unless the court of appeals concludes that the error complained of: (1) probably caused the rendition of an improper judgment; or (2) probably prevented the appellant from properly presenting the case to the court of appeals”); In re J.I.T.P., 99 S.W.3d 841, 849 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 2003, no pet.) (holding that appellant was not prevented from properly presenting her case on appeal “[b]ecause there is a complete reporter’s record,” appellant “w 2021P. 44.2(a) (providing that, in civil cases, “[n]o judgment may be reversed on appeal on the ground that the trial court made an error of law unless the court of appeals concludes that the error 14 complained of: (1) probably caused the rendition of an improper judgment; or (2) probably prevented the appellant from properly presenting the case to the court of appeals”); In re J.I.T.P., 99 S.W.3d 841, 849 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 2003, no pet.) (holding that appellant was not prevented from properly presenting her case on appeal “[b]ecause there is a complete reporter’s record,” appellant | 2 | 2 |
Friday v. Spearsgreen2 sentences2024P. 44.1(a)(1) (“No judgment may be reversed on appeal on the ground that the trial court made an error of law unless the court of appeals concludes that the error complained of . . . probably caused the rendition of an improper judgment.”); Friday v. Spears, 975 S.W.2d 699, 700 (Tex. App.—Texarkana 1998, no pet.) (“Error in the jury charge is reversible only if it probably caused the rendition of an improper verdict.”). 2020P. 44.1(a)(1) (“No judgment may be reversed on appeal on the ground that the trial court made an error of law unless the court of appeals concludes that the error complained of. . . probably caused the rendition of an improper judgment.”); Friday v. Spears, 975 S.W.2d 699, 700 (Tex. App.—Texarkana 1998, no pet.) (“Error in the jury charge is reversible only if it probably caused the rendition of an improper verdict.”). | 2 | 2 |
G & H TOWING CO. v. Mageegreen2 sentences2019P. 44.1(a)(1) (“No judgment may be reversed on appeal on the ground that the trial court made an error of law unless the court of appeals concludes that the error complained of . . . probably caused the rendition of an improper judgment . . . .”); G & H Towing Co. v. Magee, 347 S.W.3d 293, 297 (Tex. 2011) (per curiam) (“The [harmless error] rule applies to all errors.”). 2012P. 44.1(a)(1) (“No judgment may be reversed on appeal on the ground that the trial court made an error of law unless the court of appeals concludes that the error complained of ... probably caused the rendition of an improper judgment....”); G & H Towing Co. v. Magee, 347 S.W.3d 293, 297 (Tex.2011) (per curiam) (“The [harmless error] rule applies to all errors.”). | 2 | 2 |
In Re Commitment of Almaguergreen2 sentences2015App. P. 44.1(a); see also Almaguer, 117 S.W.3d at 502 . 2015App. P. 44.1(a); see also In re Commitment of Almaguer, 117 S.W.3d 500, 502 (Tex. App.—Beaumont 2003, pet. denied). | 2 | 2 |
Texas Department of Human Services v. Whitegreen2 sentences2013App. P. 44.1 (stating that no judgment may be reversed on appeal on the ground that the trial court made an error of law unless the error complained of probably caused the rendition of an improper judgment or probably prevented the appellant from properly presenting the case to the court of appeals); Tex. Dep’t of Human Servs. v. White , 817 S.W.2d 62, 63 (Tex. 1991). 2013App. P. 44.1 (stating that no judgment may be reversed on appeal on the ground that the trial court made an error of law unless the error complained of probably caused the rendition of an improper judgment or probably prevented the appellant from properly presenting the case to the court of appeals); Tex. Dep’t of Human Servs. v. White, 817 S.W.2d 62, 63 (Tex. 8 1991). | 2 | 2 |
Puentes v. FANNIE MAEgreen2 sentences2012See Tex.R.App.P. 44.1(a)(l)( “No judgment may be reversed on appeal on the ground that the trial court made an error of law unless the court of appeals concludes that the error complained of ... probably caused the rendition of an improper judgment. ...”); State v. Central Expressway Sign Associates, 302 S.W.3d 866, 870 (Tex.2009) (to warrant reversal on an evidentia-ry issue the complainant must demonstrate, in light of the entire record, that the error probably caused the rendition of an improper judgment); Puentes v. Fannie Mae, 350 S.W.3d 732, 737 (Tex.App.-El Paso 2011, pet. dism’d) (same 2012See TEX.R.APP.P. 44.1(a)(1)(“No judgment may be reversed on appeal on the ground that the trial court made an error of law unless the court of appeals concludes that the error complained of . . . probably caused the rendition of an improper judgment . . . .”); State v. Central Expressway Sign Associates, 302 S.W.3d 866, 870 (Tex. 2009)(to warrant reversal on an evidentiary issue the complainant must demonstrate, in light of the entire record, that the error probably caused the rendition of an improper judgment); Puentes v. Fannie Mae, 350 S.W.3d 732, 737 (Tex.App.--El Paso 2011, pet. dism’d)(s | 2 | 2 |
State v. Central Expressway Sign Associatesgreen2 sentences2012See Tex.R.App.P. 44.1(a)(l)( “No judgment may be reversed on appeal on the ground that the trial court made an error of law unless the court of appeals concludes that the error complained of ... probably caused the rendition of an improper judgment. ...”); State v. Central Expressway Sign Associates, 302 S.W.3d 866, 870 (Tex.2009) (to warrant reversal on an evidentia-ry issue the complainant must demonstrate, in light of the entire record, that the error probably caused the rendition of an improper judgment); Puentes v. Fannie Mae, 350 S.W.3d 732, 737 (Tex.App.-El Paso 2011, pet. dism’d) (same 2012See TEX.R.APP.P. 44.1(a)(1)(“No judgment may be reversed on appeal on the ground that the trial court made an error of law unless the court of appeals concludes that the error complained of . . . probably caused the rendition of an improper judgment . . . .”); State v. Central Expressway Sign Associates, 302 S.W.3d 866, 870 (Tex. 2009)(to warrant reversal on an evidentiary issue the complainant must demonstrate, in light of the entire record, that the error probably caused the rendition of an improper judgment); Puentes v. Fannie Mae, 350 S.W.3d 732, 737 (Tex.App.--El Paso 2011, pet. dism’d)(s | 2 | 2 |
Owens-Corning Fiberglas Corp. v. Malonegreen2 sentences2007See id. (providing that "[n]o judgment may be reversed on appeal on the ground that the trial court made an error of law unless the court of appeals concludes that the error complained of ... probably caused the rendition of an improper judgment”). 2007See id. (providing that “[n]o judgment may be reversed on appeal on the ground that the trial court made an error of law unless the court of appeals concludes that the error complained of . . . probably caused the rendition of an improper judgment”). | 2 | 2 |
Johnson v. Stategreen2 sentences2004See Johnson v. State , 68 S.W.3d 644, 649 (Tex. Crim. 2004See Johnson v. State, 68 S.W.3d 644, 649 (Tex. Crim. | 2 | 2 |
Wallace v. Wallacegreen2 sentences2001If the trial court made an error in the valuation of the stock, "the judgment will not be reversed unless from the evidence as a whole it can be demonstrated that the trial court has abused its discretion in its conclusion that the property has been divided in a manner that is just and fair." Wallace v. Wallace , 623 S.W.2d 723, 726 (Tex. Civ. 2001If the trial court made an error in the valuation of the stock, “the judgment will not be reversed unless from the evidence as a whole it can be demonstrated that the trial court has abused its discretion in its conclusion that the property has been divided in a manner that is just and fair.” Wallace v. Wallace, 623 S.W.2d 723, 726 (Tex. Civ. | 2 | 2 |
In Re Columbia Medical Center of Las Colinas, Subsidiary, L.P.green2 sentences2013Ctr., 290 S.W.3d 204, 211 (Tex.2009) (orig. proceeding) (appellate courts need explain by written opinion their anal-yses and conclusions as to the issues necessary for final disposition of an appeal). 2011Id. | 1 | 3 |
Crown Life Insurance Company v. Casteelgreen2 sentences2004Rule 44.1 of the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure provides that "[n]o judgment may be reversed on appeal on the ground that the trial court made an error of law unless the court of appeals concludes that the error complained of: (1) probably caused the rendition of an improper judgment; or (2) probably prevented the appellant from properly presenting the case to the court of appeals." In Casteel , the Court noted that charge error in submitting an invalid theory may be harmless if the "questions are submitted in a manner that allows the appellate court to determine that the jury's verdict wa 2004Rule 44.1 of the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure provides that “[n]o judgment may be reversed on appeal on the ground that the trial court made an error of law unless the court of appeals concludes that the error complained of: (1) probably caused the rendition of an improper judgment; or (2) probably prevented the appellant from properly presenting the case to the court of appeals.” In Casteel , the Court noted that charge error in submitting an invalid theory may be harmless if the “questions are submitted in a manner that allows the appellate court to determine that the jury’s verdict wa | 1 | 3 |
Star Enterprise v. Marzegreen2 sentences2014P. 44.1(a) (“No judgment may be reversed on appeal on the ground that the trial court made an error of law unless the court of appeals concludes that the error complained of . . . probably caused the rendition of an improper judgment”); Star Enterprise v. Marze, 61 S.W.3d 449, 456 (Tex. App.—San Antonia 2001, pet denied). 2010P.44.1 (a) (“No judgment may be reversed on appeal on the ground that the trial court made an error of law unless the court of appeals concludes that the error complained of ... probably caused the rendition of an improper judgment.”); Star Enterprise, 61 S.W.3d at 456 . | 1 | 2 |
Texas Ass'n of Business v. Texas Air Control Boardgreen1 sentence2024Co. v. Griffin, 955 S.W.2d 81, 84 (Tex. 1997) (reviewing justiciability principles in light of 1985 constitutional amendment to district court jurisdiction); Tex. Ass’n of Bus., 852 S.W.2d at 444 (explaining that “we have construed our separation of powers article to prohibit courts from issuing advisory opinions because such is the function of the executive rather than the judicial department”); Morrow v. Corbin, 62 S.W.2d 641, 646 (Tex. 1933) (explaining that under the constitution, appellate court jurisdiction does not extend to issuing advisory opinions)).3 3 Additionally, our rules of app | 1 | 1 |
Valadez v. Avitiagreen1 sentence2024“An appellate court has no duty—or even right—to perform an independent review of the record and applicable law to determine whether there was error.” Valadez v. Avitia, 238 S.W.3d 843, 845 (Tex. App.—El Paso 2007, no pet.). | 1 | 1 |
Farmers Texas County Mutual Insurance v. Griffingreen1 sentence2024Co. v. Griffin, 955 S.W.2d 81, 84 (Tex. 1997) (reviewing justiciability principles in light of 1985 constitutional amendment to district court jurisdiction); Tex. Ass’n of Bus., 852 S.W.2d at 444 (explaining that “we have construed our separation of powers article to prohibit courts from issuing advisory opinions because such is the function of the executive rather than the judicial department”); Morrow v. Corbin, 62 S.W.2d 641, 646 (Tex. 1933) (explaining that under the constitution, appellate court jurisdiction does not extend to issuing advisory opinions)).3 3 Additionally, our rules of app | 1 | 1 |
First United Pentecostal Church of Beaumont v. Parkergreen1 sentence2024App. P. 44.1(a). 21 Gilbreath v. Horan, 682 S.W.3d 454 , 523 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2023, pet. denied) (citing First United Pentecostal Church of Beaumont v. Parker, 514 S.W.3d 214, 220 (Tex. 2017) (“Generally, the elements of a claim for breach of fiduciary duty are (1) the existence of a fiduciary duty, (2) breach of the duty, (3) causation, and (4) damages.”)). | 1 | 1 |
Morrow v. Corbingreen1 sentence2024Co. v. Griffin, 955 S.W.2d 81, 84 (Tex. 1997) (reviewing justiciability principles in light of 1985 constitutional amendment to district court jurisdiction); Tex. Ass’n of Bus., 852 S.W.2d at 444 (explaining that “we have construed our separation of powers article to prohibit courts from issuing advisory opinions because such is the function of the executive rather than the judicial department”); Morrow v. Corbin, 62 S.W.2d 641, 646 (Tex. 1933) (explaining that under the constitution, appellate court jurisdiction does not extend to issuing advisory opinions)).3 3 Additionally, our rules of app | 1 | 1 |
| In Re Commitment of Daygreen | 1 | 1 |
| Nissan Motor Co. Ltd. v. Armstronggreen | 1 | 1 |
| Boyd v. Boydgreen | 1 | 1 |
| Burke v. Insurance Auto Auctions Corp.green | 1 | 1 |
| Timberwalk Apartments, Partners, Inc. v. Caingreen | 1 | 1 |
| Simms v. Stategreen | 1 | 1 |
| Hatteberg v. Hatteberggreen | 1 | 1 |
| Long v. Yurrickgreen | 1 | 1 |
| Shaw, Evan Lane (Van) v. Lemon, D. Brentgreen | 1 | 1 |
| Taylor v. Stategreen | 1 | 1 |
| Strange v. Continental Casualty Co.green | 1 | 1 |
| Deep Water Slender Wells, Ltd. v. Shell International Exploration & Production, Inc.green | 1 | 1 |
| St. John Missionary Baptist Church v. Flakesgreen | 1 | 1 |
| United Gas Pipe Line Co. v. Helschergreen | 1 | 1 |
| Ford Motor Co. v. Castillogreen | 1 | 1 |
| Prabhakar Guniganti, Individually, the Guniganti Children's 1999 Trust, and Triple PG Sand Development, LLC v. C & S Components Company, LTDgreen | 1 | 1 |
| Rudisell v. Paquettegreen | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Texas. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Long v. Long
green
2 sentences2011P. 44.1(a)(1) (“no judgment may be reversed on appeal on the ground that the trial court made an error of law unless the court of appeals concludes that the error complained of probably caused the rendition of an improper judgment”); Long, 234 S.W.3d at 38 . 2011P. 44.1(a)(1) (“no judgment may be reversed on appeal on the ground that the trial court made an error of law unless the court of appeals concludes that the error complained of probably caused the rendition of an improper judgment”); Long, 234 S.W.3d at 38 . | 4 | 2011–2014 |
Goode v. Shoukfeh
green
2 sentences2006App. P . 44.1(a) (stating that no judgment may be reversed on appeal on the ground that the trial court made an error of law unless the court of appeals concludes that the error complained of probably caused the rendition of an improper judgment or probably prevented the appellant from properly presenting the case to the court of appeals); Goode v. Shoukfeh , 915 S.W.2d 666, 673 (Tex. App.-Amarillo 1996), affirmed , 943 S.W.2d 441 (Tex. 1997) (overruling the point of error since the appellant did not claim or attempt to show that he was harmed by the purported error). 2003P. 44.1(a) (stating that no judgment may be reversed on appeal on the ground that the trial court made an error of law unless the court of appeals concludes that the error complained of probably caused the rendition of an improper judgment or probably prevented the appellant from properly presenting the case to the court of appeals); Goode v. Shoukfeh, 915 S.W.2d 666, 673 (Tex.App.-Amarillo 1996), affirmed, 943 S.W.2d 441 (Tex.1997) (overruling the point of error since the appellant did not claim or attempt to show that he was harmed by the purported error). | 4 | 2003–2006 |
State Ex Rel. State Highway & Public Transportation Commission v. Schless
green
2 sentences2015Enriquez v. Hooten, 857 S.W.2d 153 (Tex. App.—El Paso 1993, no writ), cited at Appellant’s Motion, p. 7, itself noted that in State v. Schless, 815 S.W.2d 373 (Tex. App.—Austin 1991)(orig. proceeding), the Court made an exception where the appeal was not from a money judgment and concluded that under TRAP 47(f), the trial court retained the discretion to deny supersedeas. 1993In State v. Schless, 815 S.W.2d 373 (Tex.App. — Austin 1991, orig. proceeding), the Court made an exception where the appeal was not from a money judgment and concluded that under Tex. R.App.P. 47(f), the trial court had discretion to deny supersedeas. | 2 | 1993–2015 |
State v. Wooldridge
green
2 sentences2010State v. Wooldridge, 170 S.W.3d 194 (Tex.App.-Eastland 2005, pet. granted). 2009Wooldridge v. State, 170 S.W.3d 194 (Tex. App.—Eastland 2005, pet. granted). | 2 | 2009–2010 |
Mitchell v. State
green
2 sentences1973In our recent opinion in Mitchell v. State, 493 S.W.2d 174 (Tex.Cr.App.1973), and Espinosa v. State, 493 S.W.2d 172 (Tex.Cr.App.1973), the essential ingredients requisite for minimal compliance with Article 26.13, V.A.C.C.P., were present. 1 In the cases at bar the court made no inquiry as to “promise” or “persuasion”. 1973In our recent opinions in Mitchell v. State, 493 S.W.2d 174 (1973), and Espinosa v. State, 493 S.W.2d 172 (1973), the essential ingredients requisite for minimal compliance with Article 26.13, V.A.C.C.P., were present. 1 In the case at bar the court made no inquiry as to either “force” or “fear”, or “promise” or “persuasion”, and did not adequately advise appellant as to the proper range of punishment. | 2 | 1973–1973 |
Espinosa v. State
green
2 sentences1973In our recent opinion in Mitchell v. State, 493 S.W.2d 174 (Tex.Cr.App.1973), and Espinosa v. State, 493 S.W.2d 172 (Tex.Cr.App.1973), the essential ingredients requisite for minimal compliance with Article 26.13, V.A.C.C.P., were present. 1 In the cases at bar the court made no inquiry as to “promise” or “persuasion”. 1973In our recent opinions in Mitchell v. State, 493 S.W.2d 174 (1973), and Espinosa v. State, 493 S.W.2d 172 (1973), the essential ingredients requisite for minimal compliance with Article 26.13, V.A.C.C.P., were present. 1 In the case at bar the court made no inquiry as to either “force” or “fear”, or “promise” or “persuasion”, and did not adequately advise appellant as to the proper range of punishment. | 2 | 1973–1973 |
William R. and Susan M. Knoderer v. State Farm Lloyds, Penni Perkins, and Tom Roberts
green
1 sentence2025“A judgment will not be reversed for 13 charge error unless the error was harmful because it probably caused the rendition of an improper verdict or probably prevented the petitioner from properly presenting the case to the appellate courts.” Knoderer, 515 S.W.3d at 41 (quoting Columbia Rio Grande Healthcare, L.P. v. Hawley, 284 S.W.3d 851, 856 (Tex. 2009)). | 1 | 2025–2025 |
| Tindel v. State green | 1 | 2023–2023 |
| Thota v. Young green | 1 | 2022–2022 |
| In Re Tyler Asphalt & Gravel Co., Inc. green | 1 | 2022–2022 |
| Dugan v. Compass Bank green | 1 | 2022–2022 |
| Zaidi v. Shah green | 1 | 2020–2020 |
| Katy International, Inc. F/ka/ Emer International, Inc., Mengghui Zhang and Binghua Jiang v. Jinchun Jiang green | 1 | 2018–2018 |
| Bed, Bath & Beyond, Inc. v. Urista green | 1 | 2015–2015 |
| Harris County v. Smith green | 1 | 2015–2015 |
| Romero v. KPH Consolidation, Inc. green | 1 | 2015–2015 |
| United Savings Ass'n of Texas v. Vandygriff green | 1 | 2015–2015 |
| City of Dallas v. North by West Entertainment, Ltd. green | 1 | 2015–2015 |
| Enriquez v. Hooten green | 1 | 2015–2015 |
| In Re Cohen green | 1 | 2013–2013 |
| Waltenburg v. Waltenburg green | 1 | 2011–2011 |
| In Re Cornyn green | 1 | 2006–2006 |
| Hernandez v. State green | 1 | 2005–2005 |
| Clements v. League of United Latin American Citizens green | 1 | 2000–2000 |
| Almanza v. State green | 1 | 1988–1988 |
| Taylor v. State green | 1 | 1979–1979 |
| United States v. Roberto Gomez-Rojas, and Michael Rece Sutherlin green | 1 | 1979–1979 |
| Portwood v. Buckalew green | 1 | 1977–1977 |
| West Texas Utilities Company v. Irvin green | 1 | 1977–1977 |
| National Farmers Organization v. Smith green | 1 | 1977–1977 |
| Upjohn Co. v. Petro Chemicals Suppliers, Inc. green | 1 | 1977–1977 |
| Flagg Realtors, Inc. v. Harvel green | 1 | 1977–1977 |
| Dietz v. Dietz green | 1 | 1977–1977 |
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.
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.