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.
11 Texas opinions name it 2 courts 1994–2021 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 |
|---|---|---|
Medina v. Stategreen2 sentences2018“Where the application paragraph correctly instructs the jury, an error in the abstract instruction is not egregious.” Medina v. State, 7 S.W.3d 633, 640 (Tex. Crim. 2018“Where the application paragraph correctly instructs the jury, an error in the abstract instruction is not egregious.” Medina v. State, 7 S.W.3d 633, 640 (Tex. Crim. | 2 | 2 |
Drichas v. Stategreen2 sentences2006See Drichas , 175 S.W.3d at 799 . 2006See Drichas, 175 S.W.3d at 799 . | 2 | 2 |
Dinkins v. Stategreen1 sentence2021But, “[w]hen we review a charge for alleged error, we must examine the charge as a whole . . . .” Dinkins v. 8 State, 894 S.W.2d 330, 339 (Tex. Crim. | 1 | 1 |
Bentley v. Buntongreen1 sentence2015See Hancock, 400 S.W.3d at 65-66 (Gertz allows juries to presume existence of general damages where speech is not public or where plaintiff proves actual malice); Bentley, 94 S.W.3d at 608 (Baker, J., dissent) (Gertz requires a reviewing court to review damage awards, and limit a defamed plaintiff's damages to those reflecting "actual injury," only when the culpability standard is less than actual malice). | 1 | 1 |
Joseph E. Hancock v. Easwaran P. Variyamgreen1 sentence2015See Hancock, 400 S.W.3d at 65-66 (Gertz allows juries to presume existence of general damages where speech is not public or where plaintiff proves actual malice); Bentley, 94 S.W.3d at 608 (Baker, J., dissent) (Gertz requires a reviewing court to review damage awards, and limit a defamed plaintiff's damages to those reflecting "actual injury," only when the culpability standard is less than actual malice). | 1 | 1 |
Aguirre v. Stategreen1 sentence2001See id. at 470-77. (1) Language of the Statute. | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Texas. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Gertz v. Robert Welch, Inc.
green
2 sentences2015Thus, defamed plaintiffs who need only prove a lower culpability standard than actual malice may recover compensation for "actual injury." Gertz, 418 U.S. at 349 . 2002Thus, defamed plaintiffs who need only prove a lower culpability standard than actual malice may only recover compensation for “actual injury.” Gertz, 418 U.S. at 349 . | 2 | 2002–2015 |
Thompson v. State
green
1 sentence2006Id. | 1 | 2006–2006 |
Time, Inc. v. Firestone
green
2 sentences2002And, in a later case, the Supreme Court reaffirmed that a private plaintiff may recover mental anguish damages even under a lower culpability standard and required only that the actual damages awarded be supported by “competent evidence.” See Time, Inc., 424 U.S. at 460 , 96 S.Ct. 958 . 2002And, in a later case, the Supreme Court reaffirmed that a private plaintiff may recover mental anguish damages even under a lower culpability standard and required only that the actual damages awarded be supported by “competent evidence.” See Time, Inc., 424 U.S. at 460 , 96 S.Ct. 958 . | 1 | 2002–2002 |
J. & J. Beverage Co. v. Texas Alcoholic Beverage Commission
green
1 sentence1994J & J Beverage Co., 810 S.W.2d at 861 . | 1 | 1994–1994 |
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.