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 2003–2019 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.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
Homes v. Cullgreen2 sentences2011See Thomas James Assocs., 1 S.W.3d at 320-21 (applying TUCO standard in case governed by FAA because “the public policy of encouraging up-front disclosure of possible arbitrator bias or partiality is equally applicable to arbitra-tions governed by the TAA or the FAA”); see also Perry Homes v. Cull, 173 S.W.3d 565, 570-71 (Tex.App.-Fort Worth 2005) (applying TUCO in FAA case), rev’d on other grounds, 258 S.W.3d 580 (Tex.2008). 2011See Thomas James Assocs. , 1 S.W.3d at 320–21 (applying TUCO standard in case governed by FAA because “the public policy of encouraging up-front disclosure of possible arbitrator bias or partiality is equally applicable to arbitrations governed by the TAA or the FAA”); see also Perry Homes v. Cull , 173 S.W.3d 565 , 570–71 (Tex. App.—Fort Worth 2005) (applying TUCO in FAA case), rev’d on other grounds , 258 S.W.3d 580 (Tex. 2008). | 2 | 2 |
Perry Homes v. Cullgreen2 sentences2011See Thomas James Assocs., 1 S.W.3d at 320-21 (applying TUCO standard in case governed by FAA because “the public policy of encouraging up-front disclosure of possible arbitrator bias or partiality is equally applicable to arbitra-tions governed by the TAA or the FAA”); see also Perry Homes v. Cull, 173 S.W.3d 565, 570-71 (Tex.App.-Fort Worth 2005) (applying TUCO in FAA case), rev’d on other grounds, 258 S.W.3d 580 (Tex.2008). 2011See Thomas James Assocs. , 1 S.W.3d at 320–21 (applying TUCO standard in case governed by FAA because “the public policy of encouraging up-front disclosure of possible arbitrator bias or partiality is equally applicable to arbitrations governed by the TAA or the FAA”); see also Perry Homes v. Cull , 173 S.W.3d 565 , 570–71 (Tex. App.—Fort Worth 2005) (applying TUCO in FAA case), rev’d on other grounds , 258 S.W.3d 580 (Tex. 2008). | 2 | 2 |
Thomas James Associates, Inc. v. Owensgreen2 sentences2011See Thomas James Assocs., 1 S.W.3d at 320-21 (applying TUCO standard in case governed by FAA because “the public policy of encouraging up-front disclosure of possible arbitrator bias or partiality is equally applicable to arbitra-tions governed by the TAA or the FAA”); see also Perry Homes v. Cull, 173 S.W.3d 565, 570-71 (Tex.App.-Fort Worth 2005) (applying TUCO in FAA case), rev’d on other grounds, 258 S.W.3d 580 (Tex.2008). 2011See Thomas James Assocs. , 1 S.W.3d at 320–21 (applying TUCO standard in case governed by FAA because “the public policy of encouraging up-front disclosure of possible arbitrator bias or partiality is equally applicable to arbitrations governed by the TAA or the FAA”); see also Perry Homes v. Cull , 173 S.W.3d 565 , 570–71 (Tex. App.—Fort Worth 2005) (applying TUCO in FAA case), rev’d on other grounds , 258 S.W.3d 580 (Tex. 2008). | 2 | 2 |
Houston Village Builders, Inc. v. Falbaumgreen2 sentences2011Builders, Inc. v. Falbaum, 105 S.W.3d 28, 32 (Tex.App.-Houston [14th Dist.] 2003, pet. denied) (citing Mariner Fin. 2011Builders, Inc. v. Falbaum, 105 S.W.3d 28, 32 (Tex.App.-Houston [14th Dist.] 2003, pet. denied) (citing Mariner Fin. | 2 | 2 |
Mariner Financial Group, Inc. v. Bossleygreen2 sentences2003See id.; see also id. at 35 (“It is well-established ... that a neutral arbitrator has a duty to disclose dealings of which he or she is aware that might create an impression of possible bias.”) (internal quotations omitted). 2003See id.; see also id. at 35 (“It is well-established ... that a neutral arbitrator has a duty to disclose dealings of which he or she is aware that might create an impression of possible bias.”) (internal quotations omitted). | 2 | 2 |
Commonwealth Coatings Corp. v. Continental Casualty Co.green2 sentences2019JAMS, however, would decide the disqualification question and “its decision shall be conclusive.” Because at least at the outset Segura had a unilateral right to strike Grissom, we apply the TUCO standard to this case. 11 Continental Casualty Company, 393 U.S. 145, 150 (1968)(White, J., concurring). 2019JAMS, however, would decide the disqualification question and “its decision shall be conclusive.” Because at least at the outset Segura had a unilateral right to strike Grissom, we apply the TUCO standard to this case. 11 Continental Casualty Company, 393 U.S. 145, 150 (1968)(White, J., concurring). | 1 | 1 |
Amoco D.T. Co. v. Occidental Petroleum Corp.green2 sentences2017See id.; Amoco D.T., 343 S.W.3d at 843 (concluding that the TUCO standard for evident partiality is applicable to cases governed by FAA). 2017See id.; Amoco D.T., 343 S.W.3d at 843 (concluding that the TUCO standard for evident partiality is applicable to cases governed by FAA). | 1 | 1 |
Forest Oil Corp. v. El Rucio Land & Cattle Co.green2 sentences2015In a recent case applying the TUCO standard, the First Court of Appeals observed, “An arbitrator has a duty to disclose facts known to him that might, to an objective observer, create a reasonable impression of the arbitrator’s partiality.” Forest Oil Corp. v. El Rucio Land & Cattle Co., Inc., 446 S.W.3d 58, 80 (Tex. App.– Houston [1st Dist.] 2014 pet. abated July 24, 2015) (emphasis in original). 2015In a recent case applying the TUCO standard, the First Court of Appeals observed, “An arbitrator has a duty to disclose facts known to him that might, to an objective observer, create a reasonable impression of the arbitrator’s partiality.” Forest Oil Corp. v. El Rucio Land & Cattle Co., Inc., 446 S.W.3d 58, 80 (Tex. App.– Houston [1st Dist.] 2014 pet. abated July 24, 2015) (emphasis in original). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Texas. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Burlington Northern Railroad v. TUCO Inc.
green
2 sentences2019TUCO, 960 S.W.2d at 636 , citing Commonwealth Coatings Corp. v. 5 The TUCO standard applies to situations where the parties select the arbitrator, and not necessarily where a third party appoints the arbitrator. 2019TUCO, 960 S.W.2d at 636 , citing Commonwealth Coatings Corp. v. 5 The TUCO standard applies to situations where the parties select the arbitrator, and not necessarily where a third party appoints the arbitrator. | 7 | 2003–2019 |
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.