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 1998–2019 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 |
|---|---|---|
Davis v. Westgreen2 sentences2019See Glasstex, Inc. v. Arch Aluminum and Glass Co., No. 13-07-00483-CV, 2016 WL 747893 , at *4 (Tex. App.—Corpus Christi–Edinburg, Feb. 25, 2016, no pet.) (mem. op.) (“[W]hile some suits against receivers are permitted, this suit is not.”); Davis v. West, 317 S.W.3d 301, 308 (Tex. App.— Houston [1st Dist.] 2009, no pet.) (“Section 64.052 does not enlarge or restrict the causes of action that may be asserted against a receiver, nor does it abrogate a receiver’s derived judicial immunity for acts taken within the scope of his receivership.”); Rehabworks, LLC v. Flanagan, No. 03-07- 00552-CV, 2009 2014See Conner, 2010 WL 4812991 , at *4 (derived judicial immunity barred breach-of-fiduciary-duty claim); Davis, 317 S.W.3d at 307 (same for abuse-of-process claim); Rehabworks, 2009 WL 483207 , at *3 (same for “money had and received” and quantum meruit claims); Rea, 879 S.W.2d at 227 (same for DTPA violations). 22 one or more of all the specified elements. | 2 | 2 |
Turner v. Pruittgreen2 sentences1998Turner v. Pruitt, 161 Tex. 582 , 342 S.W.2d 422, 423 (1961). 1998Turner v. Pruitt , 161 Tex. 532 , 342 S.W.2d 422, 423 (1961). | 2 | 2 |
Byrd v. Woodruffgreen2 sentences1998Derived Judicial Immunity In Byrd v. Woodruff, 891 S.W.2d 689 (Tex.App.—Dallas 1994, writ denied), the court of appeals explained the doctrine of derived judicial immunity as follows: Judges are immune from tort liability for acts performed or not performed in the course of judicial proceedings over which they have jurisdiction. 1998Derived Judicial Immunity In Byrd v. Woodruff , 891 S.W.2d 689 (Tex. App.--Dallas 1994, writ denied), the court of appeals explained the doctrine of derived judicial immunity as follows: Judges are immune from tort liability for acts performed or not performed in the course of judicial proceedings over which they have jurisdiction. | 1 | 3 |
Freeman v. Wirecut E.D.M., Inc.green1 sentence2019Abercia, 217 S.W.3d at 703 ; see Freeman v. Wirecut E.D.M., Inc., 159 S.W.3d 721, 728-29 (Tex.App.—Dallas 2005, no pet.)(interpreting the Merritt court’s analysis of judicial immunity in light of Section 7.003). | 1 | 1 |
Rea v. Cofergreen1 sentence2014See Conner, 2010 WL 4812991 , at *4 (derived judicial immunity barred breach-of-fiduciary-duty claim); Davis, 317 S.W.3d at 307 (same for abuse-of-process claim); Rehabworks, 2009 WL 483207 , at *3 (same for “money had and received” and quantum meruit claims); Rea, 879 S.W.2d at 227 (same for DTPA violations). 22 one or more of all the specified elements. | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Texas. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Delcourt v. Silverman
green
2 sentences2010The policy is particularly applicable to an amicus attorney who solely functions as "an extension of the court." See, e.g. , Delcourt, 919 S.W.2d at 786 . (2) To hold otherwise would thwart the intent of the statute. 2010Section 107.009 “substantially codifies existing case law that holds that the doctrine of derived judicial immunity applies to lawyers appointed as guardians ad litem in the family law context because they conduct their duties as extensions of the court.” Lehrm-ann, supra, § 3.14[l][k], The policy is particularly applicable to an amicus attor ney who solely functions as “an extension of the court.” See, e.g., Delcourt, 919 S.W.2d at 786 . 2 To hold otherwise would thwart the intent of the statute. | 3 | 2010–2010 |
Abercia v. Kingvision Pay-Per-View, Ltd.
green
1 sentence2019Abercia, 217 S.W.3d at 703 ; see Freeman v. Wirecut E.D.M., Inc., 159 S.W.3d 721, 728-29 (Tex.App.—Dallas 2005, no pet.)(interpreting the Merritt court’s analysis of judicial immunity in light of Section 7.003). | 1 | 2019–2019 |
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.