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.
10 Texas opinions name it 2 courts 1995–2024 2 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 |
|---|---|---|
Paul Reed Harper v. George Darrell Bestgreen2 sentences2018The court remanded the case to the trial court "for rendition of an order granting Harper's motion to dismiss and for a determination of Harper's request for court costs, reasonable attorney's fees, and sanctions." Id. at 118 . 2018It then remanded the case "to the trial court for rendition of an order granting Harper's motion to dismiss and for a determination of Harper's request for court costs, reasonable attorney's fees, and sanctions." Id. at 118 . | 2 | 2 |
Cravin v. Stategreen2 sentences2008See Cravin v. State , 95 S.W.3d 506, 508 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2002, pet. ref'd) (after state responded to appellant's motion for DNA testing that it could not deliver evidence for testing because evidence did not exist, convicting court's denial of appellant's motion was an implied determination evidence did not exist in accordance with Article 64.03). 2003See Cravin v. State , 95 S.W.3d 506, 508 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2002, pet. ref'd) (after state responded to appellant's motion for DNA testing that it could not deliver evidence for testing because evidence did not exist, convicting court's denial of appellant's motion was an implied determination evidence did not exist in accordance with Article 64.03). | 2 | 2 |
Lucio v. Stategreen1 sentence2024Lucio v. State, 351 S.W.3d 878, 905 (Tex. Crim. | 1 | 1 |
Joy Worsdale, Individually and as the Personal Representative of the Estate of Scott Worsdale v. the City of Killeen, Texasgreen1 sentence2024In support of its position, CPM Texas asserts that “the plain language of § 150.002 does not require a defendant itself to be a [design] professional.” “But enforcing a statute’s plain language does not mean employing a ‘bloodless literalism in which text is viewed as if it had no context.’” Worsdale v. City of Killeen, 578 S.W.3d 57, 74 (Tex. 2019) (quoting W. | 1 | 1 |
Zamorano v. Stategreen1 sentence2019See Zamorano, 84 S.W.3d at 648 ; Munoz, 991 S.W.2d at 821 . | 1 | 1 |
Bouyer v. Stategreen1 sentence2014See Robinson, 2012 WL 6518935 , at *2 (distinguishing Bouyer v. State, 264 S.W.3d 265, 268 (Tex.App.-San Antonio 2008, no pet.)). | 1 | 1 |
McDuff Ex Rel. McDuff v. Chambersgreen1 sentence1995See McDuff v. Chambers, 895 S.W.2d 492, 496 (Tex.App.—Waco 1995, writ req’d). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Texas. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
State v. Munoz
green
1 sentence2019See Zamorano, 84 S.W.3d at 648 ; Munoz, 991 S.W.2d at 821 . | 1 | 2019–2019 |
State v. Paul Reed Harper
green
1 sentence2019Id. at 8 . | 1 | 2019–2019 |
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.