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 1 courts 2001–2022 1 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 |
|---|---|---|
Certified EMS, Inc. v. Pottsgreen2 sentences2019See Certified EMS, Inc. v. Potts, 355 S.W.3d 683, 689 (Tex. App.––Houston [1st Dist.] 2011) (dismissing issues related to defendant’s interlocutory appeal of trial court’s denial of defendant’s first motion to dismiss because original reports were sufficient to implicate defendant’s conduct and because trial court granted an extension of time to cure deficiencies in original reports; thus, court lacked jurisdiction over the appeal of the denial of the first motion to dismiss) (opinion on rehearing), aff’d on other grounds, 392 S.W.3d 625 (2013). 2. 2019See Certified EMS, Inc. v. Potts, 355 S.W.3d 683, 689 (Tex. App.––Houston [1st Dist.] 2011) (dismissing issues related to defendant’s interlocutory appeal of trial court’s denial of defendant’s first motion to dismiss because original reports were sufficient to implicate defendant’s conduct and because trial court –9– granted an extension of time to cure deficiencies in original reports; thus, court lacked jurisdiction over the appeal of the denial of the first motion to dismiss) (opinion on rehearing), aff’d on other grounds, 392 S.W.3d 625 (2013). 2. | 2 | 2 |
American Transitional Care Centers of Texas, Inc. v. Palaciosgreen2 sentences2016See id. 2015See Palacios, 46 S.W.3d at 879 ; Patel, 237 report. | 2 | 2 |
LMB, LTD. v. Morenogreen2 sentences2010See id. 2010See id. | 2 | 2 |
Gardner v. U.S. Imaging, Inc.green1 sentence2022See Gardner v. U.S. Imaging, Inc., 274 S.W.3d 669 , 671–72 (Tex. 2008) (per curiam); see also Methodist Hosp. v. Addison, 574 S.W.3d 490, 502 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 2018, no pet.) (“Because we have determined that Dr. Cohen’s report adequately addressed one theory of liability against Methodist, we need not address Methodist’s remaining arguments . . . that the trial court abused its discretion when it denied Methodist’s motion to dismiss.”); Hous. | 1 | 1 |
the Methodist Hospital, Methodist Health Centers, Baylor College of Medicine and Donald T. Donovan, M.D. v. Cheryl Addisongreen1 sentence2022See Gardner v. U.S. Imaging, Inc., 274 S.W.3d 669 , 671–72 (Tex. 2008) (per curiam); see also Methodist Hosp. v. Addison, 574 S.W.3d 490, 502 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 2018, no pet.) (“Because we have determined that Dr. Cohen’s report adequately addressed one theory of liability against Methodist, we need not address Methodist’s remaining arguments . . . that the trial court abused its discretion when it denied Methodist’s motion to dismiss.”); Hous. | 1 | 1 |
McAllen Hospitals, L.P. v. Salvador Gonzalez, Individually, as Representative of the Estate of Santos Camacho, and as Representative of the Statutory Wrongful-Death Beneficiaries of Santos Camachogreen1 sentence2022Methodist Hosp. v. Nguyen, 470 S.W.3d 127, 130 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 2015, pet. denied) (concluding that expert report containing expert opinion as to claims against defendant physicians implicated the Hospital’s conduct under plaintiff’s pleaded theory of vicarious liability); McAllen Hosps., L.P. v. Gonzalez, 566 S.W.3d 451, 458 (Tex. App.—Corpus Christi–Edinburg 2018, no pet.) (“When a health care liability claim involves a vicarious liability theory, either alone or in combination with other theories, and there is an expert report sufficient to support that vicarious liability th | 1 | 1 |
Houston Methodist Hospital F/K/A the Methodist Hospital v. Kara Nguyengreen1 sentence2022Methodist Hosp. v. Nguyen, 470 S.W.3d 127, 130 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 2015, pet. denied) (concluding that expert report containing expert opinion as to claims against defendant physicians implicated the Hospital’s conduct under plaintiff’s pleaded theory of vicarious liability); McAllen Hosps., L.P. v. Gonzalez, 566 S.W.3d 451, 458 (Tex. App.—Corpus Christi–Edinburg 2018, no pet.) (“When a health care liability claim involves a vicarious liability theory, either alone or in combination with other theories, and there is an expert report sufficient to support that vicarious liability th | 1 | 1 |
Jelinek v. Casasgreen1 sentence2012See Jelinek, 328 S.W.3d at 540 . | 1 | 1 |
Chessher v. Southwestern Bell Telephone Co.green1 sentence2001Co., 658 S.W.2d 563, 564 (Tex.1983). [4] We sustain point of error one. *795 The Summary Judgment Proof In point of error two, Angela contends the trial court erred in granting summary judgment in favor of Methodist because disputed issues of material fact existed on Methodist's defense and on Angela's claims. | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Texas. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Certified Ems, Inc. D/B/A Cpns Staffing v. Cherie Potts
green
2 sentences2019See Certified EMS, Inc. v. Potts, 355 S.W.3d 683, 689 (Tex. App.––Houston [1st Dist.] 2011) (dismissing issues related to defendant’s interlocutory appeal of trial court’s denial of defendant’s first motion to dismiss because original reports were sufficient to implicate defendant’s conduct and because trial court granted an extension of time to cure deficiencies in original reports; thus, court lacked jurisdiction over the appeal of the denial of the first motion to dismiss) (opinion on rehearing), aff’d on other grounds, 392 S.W.3d 625 (2013). 2. 2019See Certified EMS, Inc. v. Potts, 355 S.W.3d 683, 689 (Tex. App.––Houston [1st Dist.] 2011) (dismissing issues related to defendant’s interlocutory appeal of trial court’s denial of defendant’s first motion to dismiss because original reports were sufficient to implicate defendant’s conduct and because trial court –9– granted an extension of time to cure deficiencies in original reports; thus, court lacked jurisdiction over the appeal of the denial of the first motion to dismiss) (opinion on rehearing), aff’d on other grounds, 392 S.W.3d 625 (2013). 2. | 2 | 2019–2019 |
Greenwood v. Tillamook Country Smoker, Inc.
green
2 sentences2006Citing Greenwood v. Tillamook Country Smoker, Inc., 857 S.W.2d 654 (Tex.App-Houston [1st Dist.] 1993, no writ), in which the First Court of Appeals held that a dismissal order is presumed to be without prejudice unless it states the dismissal is with prejudice, id. at 656 , Martinez-Parti-do next argues section 51.014(9) jurisdiction is lacking because Methodist’s motion does not seek “a dismissal with prejudice, the only available relief authorized by § 74.351(b)(2).” We disagree. 2006Citing Greenwood v. Tillamook Country Smoker, Inc., 857 S.W.2d 654 (Tex.App-Houston [1st Dist.] 1993, no writ), in which the First Court of Appeals held that a dismissal order is presumed to be without prejudice unless it states the dismissal is with prejudice, id. at 656 , Martinez-Parti-do next argues section 51.014(9) jurisdiction is lacking because Methodist’s motion does not seek “a dismissal with prejudice, the only available relief authorized by § 74.351(b)(2).” We disagree. | 1 | 2006–2006 |
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.