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 1992–2019 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 |
|---|---|---|
Stanley Stores, Inc. v. Veazeygreen2 sentences2019See Stanley Stores, Inc. v. Veazey, 838 S.W.2d 884 , 885–86 (Tex. App.–Beaumont 1992, writ denied). 2019See Stanley Stores, Inc. v. Veazey, 838 S.W.2d 884 , 885–86 (Tex. App.–Beaumont 1992, writ denied). | 4 | 7 |
Keetch v. Kroger Co.green2 sentences1998Keetch v. Kroger Co., 845 S.W.2d 262, 264 (Tex.1992). 4 Thus, we view appellants’ point of error one as a contention that, as a matter of law, Mr. Daenen failed to establish that appellants had actual or constructive knowledge of the dangerous condition of the steps prior to Mr. Daenen’s use of same. 1998Keetch v. Kroger Co., 845 S.W.2d 262, 264 (Tex.1992). 4 Thus, we view appellants’ point of error one as a contention that, as a matter of law, Mr. Daenen failed to establish that appellants had actual or constructive knowledge of the dangerous condition of the steps prior to Mr. Daenen’s use of same. | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Texas. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. Reece
green
2 sentences2014This “time-notice rule” requires evidence of the length of time the unreasonably dangerous condition existed prior to the injury-causing event.1 Reece, 81 S.W.3d at 816 ; Richardson, 963 S.W.2d at 166 ; Hayes v. Vista Host, Inc., 03-08-00053-CV, 2009 WL 722288 , at *4 (Tex. App.—Austin Mar. 20, 2009, no pet.) (mem. op.). 2014This “time-notice rule” requires evidence of the length of time the unreasonably dangerous condition existed prior to the injury-causing event.1 Reece, 81 S.W.3d at 816 ; Richardson, 963 S.W.2d at 166 ; Hayes v. Vista Host, Inc., 03-08-00053-CV, 2009 WL 722288 , at *4 (Tex. App.—Austin Mar. 20, 2009, no pet.) (mem. op.). | 1 | 2014–2014 |
Richardson v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc.
green
2 sentences2014This “time-notice rule” requires evidence of the length of time the unreasonably dangerous condition existed prior to the injury-causing event.1 Reece, 81 S.W.3d at 816 ; Richardson, 963 S.W.2d at 166 ; Hayes v. Vista Host, Inc., 03-08-00053-CV, 2009 WL 722288 , at *4 (Tex. App.—Austin Mar. 20, 2009, no pet.) (mem. op.). 2014This “time-notice rule” requires evidence of the length of time the unreasonably dangerous condition existed prior to the injury-causing event.1 Reece, 81 S.W.3d at 816 ; Richardson, 963 S.W.2d at 166 ; Hayes v. Vista Host, Inc., 03-08-00053-CV, 2009 WL 722288 , at *4 (Tex. App.—Austin Mar. 20, 2009, no pet.) (mem. op.). | 1 | 2014–2014 |
Seideneck v. Cal Bayreuther Associates
green
2 sentences1992As indicated in note 6, supra, Keetch did object on the ground that the case should have been submitted as Keetch suggested in her Question 3, which was a proper broad-form question. 1992As indicated in note 6, supra, Keetch did object on the ground that the case should have been submitted as Keetch suggested in her Question 3, which was a proper broadform question. | 1 | 1992–1992 |