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 3 courts 1983–2024 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.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
Walker v. Packergreen2 sentences2024See Walker v. Packer, 827 S.W.2d 833, 837 (Tex. 1992) (“[H]aving failed to meet this burden [of providing a record of the evidentiary hearing below], the [relators] have not provided us with a record upon which they can establish the right to mandamus relief . . . “). 2 confirming both that the State had met its statutory burden of proof and that the court had properly considered each of the factors required to overcome the qualified journalist’s privilege. 2024See Walker v. Packer, 827 S.W.2d 833, 837 (Tex. 1992) (stating, “having failed to meet this burden [of providing a record of the evidentiary hearing below], the [relators] have not provided us with a record upon which they can establish the right to mandamus relief . . . “). | 2 | 2 |
Simon v. York Crane & Rigging Co., Inc.green2 sentences2004See Simon , 739 S.W.2d at 795 . 2004See Simon, 739 S.W.2d at 795 . | 2 | 2 |
Weisel Enterprises, Inc. v. Currygreen1 sentence2024Cf., Weisel Enterprises, Inc. v. Curry, 718 S.W.2d 56, 58 (Tex. 1986) (discussing a relator’s basis for 3 Without a record, the State argues this Court cannot determine precisely how the trial court allegedly abused its discretion when considering evidence on each of the Article 38.11 factors before compelling KVIA to produce the materials. | 1 | 1 |
City of Houston v. Woodsgreen1 sentence2021Id. at 582 (footnote omitted). | 1 | 1 |
LMC COMPLETE AUTOMOTIVE, INC. v. Burkegreen1 sentence2014See LMC Complete, 261 S.W.3d at 749 ; see also Knowles v. Mack, No. 04-04-00422-CV, 2004 WL 2046612 , at *1 (Tex. App.—San Antonio Sept. 15, 2004, no pet.) (mem. op.) (“Without a record of the evidence the trial court considered in deciding whether the amount of the bond would likely cause Knowles substantial economic harm, we cannot conclude the trial court abused its discretion in denying Knowles’ written motion to reduce the amount of security.”). | 1 | 1 |
Birnbaum v. Law Offices of G. David Westfall, P.C.green1 sentence2013See Birnbaum, 120 S.W.3d at 476 . | 1 | 1 |
In Re Canalesgreen1 sentence2004See Canales , 113 S.W.3d at 68 ; Barr , 13 S.W.3d at 533 (op. on orig. submission). | 1 | 1 |
In Re Barrgreen1 sentence2004See Canales , 113 S.W.3d at 68 ; Barr , 13 S.W.3d at 533 (op. on orig. submission). | 1 | 1 |
Ex parte Carnesgreen2 sentences1983See Ex parte Carnes, 579 S.W.2d 249 (Tex.Cr.App.1979). 1983See Ex parte Carnes, 579 S.W.2d 249 (Tex.Cr.App.1979). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Texas. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Adams v. State
green
1 sentence1992It is a question of law under the Adams standard whether, "in the context of the case, this (failure to convey some requisite item of `notice') had an impact on the defendant's ability to prepare a defense, and finally, how great an impact." Adams, 707 S.W.2d at 903 . | 1 | 1992–1992 |
Swain v. Alabama
red
2 sentences1988Applicant filed this application for writ of habeas corpus pursuant to Article 11.07, Sec. 2, V.A.C.C.P., alleging his conviction was invalid because the Dallas County District Attorney's Office has a history of systematically excluding blacks from juries solely on the basis of race in violation of Swain v. Alabama, 380 U.S. 202 , 85 S.Ct. 824 , 13 L.Ed.2d 759 (1965). [1] On November 30, 1987, we remanded this cause to the trial court for appointment of an attorney for applicant and for an evidentiary hearing to determine whether applicant could produce evidence to support his claim under Swai 1988Applicant filed this application for writ of habeas corpus pursuant to Article 11.07, Sec. 2, V.A.C.C.P., alleging his conviction was invalid because the Dallas County District Attorney's Office has a history of systematically excluding blacks from juries solely on the basis of race in violation of Swain v. Alabama, 380 U.S. 202 , 85 S.Ct. 824 , 13 L.Ed.2d 759 (1965). [1] On November 30, 1987, we remanded this cause to the trial court for appointment of an attorney for applicant and for an evidentiary hearing to determine whether applicant could produce evidence to support his claim under Swai | 1 | 1988–1988 |
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.