relation doctrine (Texas) · Go Syfert
← Texas issues

relation doctrine in Texas

11 Texas opinions name it 2 courts 1896–2020 0 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 (1)

CaseFollowedCited
NCNB Texas National Bank v. Cokergreen
tex · 1989 · cited in 4 Texas opinions naming this issue, 1999–2020
2 sentences

2009In Coker , the court held that A [t]he vagueness of the court = s order indicates that the substantial relation test was not used; had it been, the court should have been able to state without difficulty the precise factors establishing a substantial relationship between the two representations. @ Coker , 765 S.W.2d at 400 .

2006The court’s findings, which speak only generally of Drake’s representation of BCAD, “fall[ ] short of the requisites of the established substantial relation standard.” See Coker, 765 S.W.2d at 400 .

14

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 (11)

CaseCitedYears
Gibson v. Chouteau green
· 1872
2 sentences

1930The doctrine of relation, whether by enactment, as in the charter of Dallas, or by implication, as in the cases cited,_ is employed only when necessary to prevent'injustice that may result from happenings between the real and fictitious dates of the major event. - ' The doctrine was defined by the Supreme Court of the United States, in Gibson v. Chouteau, 13 Wall. 92, 100 , 20 L.

1930The doctrine of relation, whether by enactment, as in the charter of Dallas, or by implication, as in the cases cited,_ is employed only when necessary to prevent'injustice that may result from happenings between the real and fictitious dates of the major event. - ' The doctrine was defined by the Supreme Court of the United States, in Gibson v. Chouteau, 13 Wall. 92, 100 , 20 L.

21928–1930
In Re Drake green
texapp · 2006
1 sentence

2013Id. at 237 .

12013–2013
Kotteakos v. United States green
scotus · 1946
2 sentences

1989Id., at 761-762 , 66 S.Ct. at 1246 .

1989Id., at 761-762 , 66 S.Ct. at 1246 .

11989–1989
Milk Wagon Drivers Union, Local 753 v. Meadowmoor Dairies, Inc. green
scotus · 1941
2 sentences

1949Milk Wagon Drivers Union v. Meadowmoor Dairies, 312 U.S. 287 , 61 S.Ct. 552 , 85 L.Ed. 836 , 132 A.L.R. 1200 , originated in the Illinois courts, and was an appeal by certiorari to the Supreme Court of that State.

1949Milk Wagon Drivers Union v. Meadowmoor Dairies, 312 U.S. 287 , 61 S.Ct. 552 , 85 L.Ed. 836 , 132 A.L.R. 1200 , originated in the Illinois courts, and was an appeal by certiorari to the Supreme Court of that State.

11949–1949
Knapp v. Alexander-Edgar Lumber Co. green
scotus · 1915
2 sentences

1928The last proceeding which consummates the conveyance is held for certain purposes to take effect by relation as of the day when the first proceeding was had." In Peyton v. Desmond, 129 F. 1, 11-13 , Judge Van Devanter, for the Circuit Court of Appeals, after stating that the doctrine of relation was of equitable origin, invoked to promote justice and give effect to the lawful intention of parties (page 13), said: "The principles underlying and supporting the doctrine of relation are such that it may be as readily invoked to remedy or correct a loss such as is here disclosed, occurring while th

1928The last proceeding which consummates the conveyance is held for certain purposes to take effect by relation as of the day when the first proceeding was had." In Peyton v. Desmond, 129 F. 1, 11-13 , Judge Van Devanter, for the Circuit Court of Appeals, after stating that the doctrine of relation was of equitable origin, invoked to promote justice and give effect to the lawful intention of parties (page 13), said: "The principles underlying and supporting the doctrine of relation are such that it may be as readily invoked to remedy or correct a loss such as is here disclosed, occurring while th

11928–1928
Peyton v. Desmond green
ca8 · 1904
1 sentence

1928The last proceeding which consummates the conveyance is held for certain purposes to take effect by relation as of the day when the first proceeding was had." In Peyton v. Desmond, 129 F. 1, 11-13 , Judge Van Devanter, for the Circuit Court of Appeals, after stating that the doctrine of relation was of equitable origin, invoked to promote justice and give effect to the lawful intention of parties (page 13), said: "The principles underlying and supporting the doctrine of relation are such that it may be as readily invoked to remedy or correct a loss such as is here disclosed, occurring while th

11928–1928
Krakow v. Wille neutral
wis · 1905
2 sentences

1928The last proceeding which consummates the conveyance is held for certain purposes to take effect by relation as of the day when the first proceeding was had." In Peyton v. Desmond, 129 F. 1, 11-13 , Judge Van Devanter, for the Circuit Court of Appeals, after stating that the doctrine of relation was of equitable origin, invoked to promote justice and give effect to the lawful intention of parties (page 13), said: "The principles underlying and supporting the doctrine of relation are such that it may be as readily invoked to remedy or correct a loss such as is here disclosed, occurring while th

1928The last proceeding which consummates the conveyance is held for certain purposes to take effect by relation as of the day when the first proceeding was had." In Peyton v. Desmond, 129 F. 1, 11-13 , Judge Van Devanter, for the Circuit Court of Appeals, after stating that the doctrine of relation was of equitable origin, invoked to promote justice and give effect to the lawful intention of parties (page 13), said: "The principles underlying and supporting the doctrine of relation are such that it may be as readily invoked to remedy or correct a loss such as is here disclosed, occurring while th

11928–1928
Harrison v. Corry Pharmacy neutral
okla · 1920
2 sentences

1928The last proceeding which consummates the conveyance is held for certain purposes to take effect by relation as of the day when the first proceeding was had." In Peyton v. Desmond, 129 F. 1, 11-13 , Judge Van Devanter, for the Circuit Court of Appeals, after stating that the doctrine of relation was of equitable origin, invoked to promote justice and give effect to the lawful intention of parties (page 13), said: "The principles underlying and supporting the doctrine of relation are such that it may be as readily invoked to remedy or correct a loss such as is here disclosed, occurring while th

1928The last proceeding which consummates the conveyance is held for certain purposes to take effect by relation as of the day when the first proceeding was had." In Peyton v. Desmond, 129 F. 1, 11-13 , Judge Van Devanter, for the Circuit Court of Appeals, after stating that the doctrine of relation was of equitable origin, invoked to promote justice and give effect to the lawful intention of parties (page 13), said: "The principles underlying and supporting the doctrine of relation are such that it may be as readily invoked to remedy or correct a loss such as is here disclosed, occurring while th

11928–1928
Ramsay v. . Miller green
ny · 1911
1 sentence

1923“The equitable doctrine of relation applies; that is, that ratification relates back to the date of the contract between the agent and the third party.” Id.

11923–1923
Ruffier v. Womack green
· 1867
1 sentence

1896Ruffier v. Womack, 30 Texas, 332 ; Hubby v. Harris, 68 Texas, 91 .

11896–1896
Hubby v. Harris neutral
· 1887
1 sentence

1896Ruffier v. Womack, 30 Texas, 332 ; Hubby v. Harris, 68 Texas, 91 .

11896–1896

Where else courts name it

CA 18 (1880–2018) WY 11 (1928–2007) TX 11 (1896–2020) NY 10 (1809–2003) PA 10 (1855–2025) IN 8 (1845–1917) MD 7 (1974–1983) IL 7 (1909–2025) WA 7 (1911–2021) ND 6 (1914–1996) MI 6 (1895–2008) AL 5 (1845–2007) OK 5 (1912–1974) MN 5 (1886–1927) MT 4 (1912–2014) MA 4 (1924–2017) MO 4 (1871–2003) TN 4 (1826–2007) LA 3 (1912–2011) CO 3 (1886–1976) KS 3 (1911–1934) WI 3 (1926–2008) ID 3 (1922–2008) NM 3 (1912–2021) IA 3 (1852–2017) FL 3 (1882–1990) NJ 2 (1830–1919) NE 2 (1897–2003) OH 2 (1927–1991) OR 2 (1868–1923) NC 2 (1900–1988)

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.

← Caselaw search · G Cite Topics · Brief Check