mirror image rule (Texas) · Go Syfert
← Texas issues

mirror image rule in Texas

11 Texas opinions name it 3 courts 2006–2026 3 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 (9)

CaseFollowedCited
First City National Bank of Midland v. Concord Oil Co.green
texapp · 1991 · cited in 3 Texas opinions naming this issue, 2006–2006
2 sentences

2006First City Nat'l Bank of Midland v. Concord Oil Co. , 808 S.W.2d 133, 138 (Tex. App.—El Paso 1991, no writ).

2006First City Nat’l Bank of Midland v. Concord Oil Co., 808 S.W.2d 133, 138 (Tex.App.-El Paso 1991, no writ).

33
Save Our Springs Alliance, Inc. v. Lazy Nine Municipal Utility District Ex Rel. Board of Directorsgreen
texapp · 2006 · cited in 4 Texas opinions naming this issue, 2013–2025
2 sentences

2020“Once a plaintiff claims relief under the Declaratory Judgments Act, the mirror-image rule does not prohibit the trial court from awarding attorney’s fees even if the defendant’s counterclaim for declaratory relief only duplicates the claims already raised.” Save Our Springs, 198 S.W.3d at 318 .

2020As discussed above, when, as here, the plaintiff requests declaratory relief, the mirror-image rule does not prohibit the trial court from awarding attorney fees. 20 See Castille, 2017 WL 3910918 , at *11; Save Our Springs All., 198 S.W.3d at 318 .

14
Breitenfeld v. SAS Institute, Inc.green
texapp · 2004 · cited in 2 Texas opinions naming this issue, 2015–2015
2 sentences

2015Thomas,902 S.'W.2d at 626; Breitenfeld v. ,Sl,S Institute, Inc., 147 S.W.3d 672, 679-80 (Tex. App.-Dallas 2004, no pet.) ("attorney's fees are not authorized where a counterclaim requests a declaratory judgment that is the mirror image of a claim akeady asserted by an adversary in the suit").

2015Thomas v. Thomas, 902 17 4819-7441-3093.v1 S.W.2d 621, 626 (Tex. App.—Austin 1995, writ denied); Breitenfeld v. SAS Institute, Inc., 147 S.W.3d 672 , 679–80 (Tex. App.—Dallas 2004, no pet.) (“attorney’s fees are not authorized where a counterclaim requests a declaratory judgment that is the mirror image of a claim already asserted by an adversary in the suit”).

12
Howell v. Mauzygreen
texapp · 1994 · cited in 1 Texas opinions naming this issue, 2026–2026
1 sentence

2026This mirror-image rule prohibits the invocation of a declaratory judgment counterclaim “that presents no new controversy.” Howell v. Mauzy, 899 S.W.2d 690, 706 (Tex. -4- 04-25-00104-CV App.—Austin 1994, writ denied).

11
Kerry Heckman, on Behalf of Themselves and All Other Persons Similarly Situated v. Williamson Countygreen
tex · 2012 · cited in 1 Texas opinions naming this issue, 2026–2026
1 sentence

2026Heckman v. Williamson Cnty., 369 S.W.3d 137, 162 (Tex. 2012) (footnotes omitted). [¶ 110] Likewise, the Mavericks’ declaratory judgment action subsumed the Stars’ requested defensive declarations that the April 2nd Order also mooted. 96 Mavericks’ Counterclaim DJ Motion Reply at 8-13. -38- [¶ 111] Finally, the Stars correctly cited several cases for the point that the mirror image rule does not necessarily negate a declaratory judgment counterclaim,97 but those cases mean only that the defendant can still recover their fees under Civil Practice and Remedies Code § 37.009.

11
BHP Petroleum Co., Inc. v. Millardgreen
tex · 1991 · cited in 1 Texas opinions naming this issue, 2026–2026
1 sentence

2026See BHP Petroleum, 800 S.W.2d at 842 .

11
Winslow v. Ackergreen
texapp · 1989 · cited in 1 Texas opinions naming this issue, 2026–2026
1 sentence

2026An exception to this rule exists when the declaratory judgment counterclaim “has greater ramifications than the original suit.” Winslow v. Acker, 781 S.W.2d 322, 328 (Tex. App.—San Antonio 1989, writ denied).

11
Elder v. Brogreen
texapp · 1991 · cited in 1 Texas opinions naming this issue, 2013–2013
1 sentence

2013Bd. of Directors, 198 S.W.3d 300, 318 (Tex.App.-Texarkana 2006, pet. denied) (“Once a plaintiff claims *776 relief under the Declaratory Judgments Act, the mirror-image rule does not prohibit the trial court from awarding attorney’s fees even if the defendant’s counterclaim for declaratory relief only duplicates the claims already raised.”); Elder v. Bro, 809 S.W.2d 799, 801 (TexApp.-Houston [14th Dist.] 1991, writ denied) (“In a suit where the plaintiff seeks a declaratory judgment, a counterclaim for declaratory relief is available to settle the dispute which was brought in the original acti

11
Hawkins v. Texas Oil and Gas Corp.green
texapp · 1987 · cited in 1 Texas opinions naming this issue, 2013–2013
1 sentence

2013Bd. of Directors, 198 S.W.3d 300, 318 (Tex.App.-Texarkana 2006, pet. denied) (“Once a plaintiff claims *776 relief under the Declaratory Judgments Act, the mirror-image rule does not prohibit the trial court from awarding attorney’s fees even if the defendant’s counterclaim for declaratory relief only duplicates the claims already raised.”); Elder v. Bro, 809 S.W.2d 799, 801 (TexApp.-Houston [14th Dist.] 1991, writ denied) (“In a suit where the plaintiff seeks a declaratory judgment, a counterclaim for declaratory relief is available to settle the dispute which was brought in the original acti

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 (1)

CaseCitedYears
Washington Square Financial, L.L.C. D/B/A Imperial Structured Settlements v. RSL Funding L.L.C. green
texapp · 2013
1 sentence

2020The rationale is that, because a court may award attorney’s fees to either party under the Act, “a defendant that raises a mirror- image counterclaim in response to the plaintiff’s declaratory-judgment claim cannot be said to have raised the counterclaim solely to pave the way for an award of otherwise-impermissible attorney’s fees.” Washington Square, 418 S.W.3d at 776 ; see Castille v. Serv.

12020–2020

Where else courts name it

TX 11 (2006–2026) CA 9 (2002–2025) DE 7 (1999–2024) IL 3 (2007–2022) MS 2 (1998–2000) MA 2 (2012–2016) IA 2 (2001–2018)

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