mandates rule (Texas) · Go Syfert
← Texas issues

mandates rule in Texas

10 Texas opinions name it 1 courts 2006–2015 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 (7)

CaseFollowedCited
Thordson v. City of Houstongreen
tex · 1991 · cited in 3 Texas opinions naming this issue, 2010–2010
2 sentences

2010See Thordson, 815 S.W.2d at 551 (holding, under language of rule 165a(4) requiring that judge “shall” set hearing on motion to reinstate as soon as practicable, it was not within trial court’s discretion to fail to hold a hearing on motion to reinstate).

2010See Thordson, 815 S.W.2d at 551 (holding, under language of rule 165a(4) requiring that judge Ashall@ set hearing on motion to reinstate as soon as practicable, it was not within trial court=s discretion to fail to hold a hearing on motion to reinstate).

33
Goodyear Dunlop Tires North America, Ltd. v. Gamezgreen
texapp · 2004 · cited in 3 Texas opinions naming this issue, 2006–2007
2 sentences

2007P. 173.4; Gamez, 151 S.W.3d at 583 (discussing the mandates of rule 173 before February 1, 2005). 5 .

2006P. 173.4; Gamez, 151 S.W.3d at 583 (discussing the mandates of rule 173 before February 1, 2005).

33
In Re Completerx, Ltd.green
texapp · 2012 · cited in 1 Texas opinions naming this issue, 2015–2015
1 sentence

2015See id.; see also In re CompleteRx, Ltd., 366 S.W.3d 318, 324-325 (Tex. App.--Tyler 2012, orig. proceeding) (“For this court to relax the mandates of the rule would be tantamount to amending established rules of procedure. [ ] This rulemaking power is invested solely in the Supreme Court of Texas. [ ] Accordingly, we hold the trial court clearly abused its discretion when it granted Good Shepherd's motion for modification of [TEX.

11
Bourgeois v. Colliergreen
texapp · 1997 · cited in 1 Texas opinions naming this issue, 2013–2013
1 sentence

2013See Bourgeois. 959 S.W.2d at 246 .

11
Metro Dairy Queen Stores v. Dominguezgreen
texapp · 1994 · cited in 1 Texas opinions naming this issue, 2012–2012
1 sentence

2012Metro Dairy Queen Stores v. Dominguez, 883 S.W.2d 322, 324 (Tex.App.-El Paso 1994, no pet.).

11
In Re MPBgreen
texapp · 2008 · cited in 1 Texas opinions naming this issue, 2010–2010
1 sentence

2010Even if a party complies with the mandates of rule 216, the party must act affirmatively to secure his right to a jury trial by either “object[ing] on the record to the trial court’s action [in proceeding without a jury] or indicat[ing] affirmatively on the record [he] intends to stand on his perfected right to a jury trial.” Sunwest Reliance Acquisitions Group, Inc. v. Provident Nat’l Assurance Co., 875 S.W.2d 385, 387 (Tex. App.—Dallas 1993, no writ); see also In re M.P.B., 257 S.W.3d 804, 811 (Tex. App.—Dallas 2008, no pet.) (holding appellant waived right to jury trial by failing to object

11
Sunwest Reliance Acquisitions Group, Inc. v. Provident National Assurance Co.green
texapp · 1993 · cited in 1 Texas opinions naming this issue, 2010–2010
1 sentence

2010Even if a party complies with the mandates of rule 216, the party must act affirmatively to secure his right to a jury trial by either “object[ing] on the record to the trial court’s action [in proceeding without a jury] or indicat[ing] affirmatively on the record [he] intends to stand on his perfected right to a jury trial.” Sunwest Reliance Acquisitions Group, Inc. v. Provident Nat’l Assurance Co., 875 S.W.2d 385, 387 (Tex. App.—Dallas 1993, no writ); see also In re M.P.B., 257 S.W.3d 804, 811 (Tex. App.—Dallas 2008, no pet.) (holding appellant waived right to jury trial by failing to object

11

Distinguished, questioned or overruled (0)

CaseNegativeCited
No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Texas. Read the followed side critically anyway.

Where else courts name it

TX 10 (2006–2015) PA 8 (1983–2026) IL 5 (1974–2026) UT 5 (2001–2025) MA 2 (1989–1995) AR 2 (2026–2026) IA 2 (1979–1988) FL 2 (2012–2025) MO 2 (1984–2008)

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