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.
9 Texas opinions name it 1 courts 2006–2018 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 |
|---|---|---|
Towns of Concord, Norwood, and Wellesley, Massachusetts v. Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, Boston Edison Company, Intervenorgreen2 sentences2006See Concord v. Federal Energy Regulatory Comm'n , 955 F.2d 67, 71 (D.C. 2006See Concord v. Federal Energy Regulatory Comm’n, 955 F.2d 67, 71 (D.C. | 7 | 7 |
City of Cleveland, Ohio v. Federal Power Commission, Cleveland Electric Illuminating Company, Intervenorgreen1 sentence2006See Concord v. Federal Energy Regulatory Comm’n, 955 F.2d 67, 71 (D.C.Cir.1992); City of Cleveland v. Federal Power Comm’n, 525 F.2d 845, 854 (D.C.Cir.1976). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Texas. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Arkansas Louisiana Gas Co. v. Hall
green
2 sentences2006Gas, 453 U.S. at 577-78 . 19 The considerations underlying the doctrine are the preservation of the regulatory agency’s primary jurisdiction over reasonableness of rates and the need to insure that regulated companies charge only those rates of which the regulatory agency has been made cognizant. 2006Gas, 453 U.S. at 577-78 . 19 The considerations underlying the doctrine are the preservation of the regulatory agency’s primary jurisdiction over reasonableness of rates and the need to insure that regulated companies charge only those rates of which the regulatory agency has been made cognizant. | 3 | 2006–2006 |
Wasson Interests, Ltd. v. City of Jacksonville, Texas
green
1 sentence2018As described above, to determine whether an entity is immune, courts should rely on "the 'nature and purposes' of sovereign immunity." UIW , 518 S.W.3d at 911 (citing Wasson , 489 S.W.3d at 432 ); see also ids="6799983" index="67" url="https://cite. case.law/sw3d/489/427/#p431">id. (whether an entity is entitled to sovereign immunity and whether an entity is a "governmental unit" for purposes of an interlocutory appeal "are separate questions with separate analytical frameworks"). | 1 | 2018–2018 |
University of the Incarnate Word v. Redus
green
1 sentence2018As described above, to determine whether an entity is immune, courts should rely on "the 'nature and purposes' of sovereign immunity." UIW , 518 S.W.3d at 911 (citing Wasson , 489 S.W.3d at 432 ); see also ids="6799983" index="67" url="https://cite. case.law/sw3d/489/427/#p431">id. (whether an entity is entitled to sovereign immunity and whether an entity is a "governmental unit" for purposes of an interlocutory appeal "are separate questions with separate analytical frameworks"). | 1 | 2018–2018 |
Reata Construction Corp. v. City of Dallas
green
1 sentence2013In Reata, the court noted that the considerations underlying immunity from suit were not adversely implicated by its holding. 197 S.W.3d at 375 . | 1 | 2013–2013 |
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.
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.