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 3 courts 1976–2020 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 |
|---|---|---|
in the Estate of Rosa Elvia Guerrerogreen1 sentence2020See In re Guerrero, 465 S.W.3d 693 , 703–04 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 2015, pet. denied) (en banc) (“The evidentiary standards for a motion to compel arbitration are the same as for a motion for summary judgment. | 1 | 1 |
DiGiuseppe v. Lawlergreen1 sentence2019Specific performance is an equitable remedy, DiGiuseppe v. Lawler, 269 S.W.3d 588, 593 (Tex. 2008), and is used as a substitute for monetary damages when such a remedy would be inadequate. | 1 | 1 |
Thrift v. Hubbardgreen2 sentences2004See Thrift v. Hubbard, 974 S.W.2d 70, 77 (Tex.App.-San Antonio 1998, pet. denied) (reviewing court does not pass upon the credibility of witnesses). 2004See Thrift v. Hubbard, 974 S.W.2d 70, 77 (Tex.App.-San Antonio 1998, pet. denied) (reviewing court does not pass upon the credibility of witnesses). | 1 | 1 |
Desiga v. Scheffeygreen1 sentence1994See Desiga v. Scheffey, 874 S.W.2d 244 (Tex.App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 1994, n.w.h.) (holding that when the trial court sets a single hearing for multiple motions for summary judgment, and all the motions and arguments are heard together, the court may look to other summary judgment proof on file with the court, to determine whether a moving party is entitled to summary judgment). | 1 | 1 |
State v. Wagnergreen1 sentence1993See State v. Wagner, 810 S.W.2d 207, 208 (Tex.Crim.App.1991) (concurring opinion); State v. Wagner, 821 S.W.2d 288, 290-91 (Tex.App.—Dallas 1991, pet. ref’d) (opinion on remand); King v. State, 816 S.W.2d 447, 451 (Tex.App.—Dallas 1991, pet. ref’d). | 1 | 1 |
State v. Wagnergreen1 sentence1993See State v. Wagner, 810 S.W.2d 207, 208 (Tex.Crim.App.1991) (concurring opinion); State v. Wagner, 821 S.W.2d 288, 290-91 (Tex.App.—Dallas 1991, pet. ref’d) (opinion on remand); King v. State, 816 S.W.2d 447, 451 (Tex.App.—Dallas 1991, pet. ref’d). | 1 | 1 |
King v. Stategreen1 sentence1993See State v. Wagner, 810 S.W.2d 207, 208 (Tex.Crim.App.1991) (concurring opinion); State v. Wagner, 821 S.W.2d 288, 290-91 (Tex.App.—Dallas 1991, pet. ref’d) (opinion on remand); King v. State, 816 S.W.2d 447, 451 (Tex.App.—Dallas 1991, pet. ref’d). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Texas. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Okorafor v. UNCLE SAM & ASSOCIATES, INC.
green
1 sentence2020See McAllen, 268 S.W.3d at 56; Okorafor, 295 S.W.3d at 38 . | 1 | 2020–2020 |
Operation Rescue-National v. Planned Parenthood of Houston & Southeast Texas, Inc.
green
1 sentence2008Operation Rescue-Nat’l, 937 S.W.2d at 87 . | 1 | 2008–2008 |
Batson v. Kentucky
green
2 sentences1996The State contends that Holt’s assertion is not supported by the record and relies on the deference given to trial court findings to argue that Holt’s first point of error should be overruled. *297 PEREMPTORY CHALLENGES The authority for Holt’s challenge is found in the U.S. Supreme Court’s holding in Batson v. Kentucky, 476 U.S. 79 , 106 S.Ct. 1712 , 90 L.Ed.2d 69 (1986). 1996The State contends that Holt’s assertion is not supported by the record and relies on the deference given to trial court findings to argue that Holt’s first point of error should be overruled. *297 PEREMPTORY CHALLENGES The authority for Holt’s challenge is found in the U.S. Supreme Court’s holding in Batson v. Kentucky, 476 U.S. 79 , 106 S.Ct. 1712 , 90 L.Ed.2d 69 (1986). | 1 | 1996–1996 |
State v. Holt
green
2 sentences1994State v. Holt, 852 S.W.2d 47 (Tex.App.—Fort Worth 1993). 1994State v. Holt, 852 S.W.2d 47 (Tex.App.—Fort Worth 1993). | 1 | 1994–1994 |
Brown v. Texas
green
2 sentences1993On appeal, the State contends the trial court erred in holding the constitutionality of a checkpoint depends not only on the Brown test, but also on a threshold finding that the checkpoint was adminis tered in accordance with a state-wide legislatively developed administrative scheme. 1 See Brown v. Texas, 443 U.S. 47 , 99 S.Ct. 2637 , 61 L.Ed.2d 357 (1979). 1993On appeal, the State contends the trial court erred in holding the constitutionality of a checkpoint depends not only on the Brown test, but also on a threshold finding that the checkpoint was adminis tered in accordance with a state-wide legislatively developed administrative scheme. 1 See Brown v. Texas, 443 U.S. 47 , 99 S.Ct. 2637 , 61 L.Ed.2d 357 (1979). | 1 | 1993–1993 |
Michigan Department of State Police v. Sitz
green
2 sentences1993The trial court sustained Holt’s motion to suppress the evidence, because it relied on two Dallas Court of Appeals cases and dicta in a concurring opinion of the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals that interpret Michigan State Police v. Sitz, 496 U.S. 444 , 110 S.Ct. 2481 , 110 L.Ed.2d 412 (1990), as requiring legislative authorization for a DWI roadblock. 1993The trial court sustained Holt’s motion to suppress the evidence, because it relied on two Dallas Court of Appeals cases and dicta in a concurring opinion of the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals that interpret Michigan State Police v. Sitz, 496 U.S. 444 , 110 S.Ct. 2481 , 110 L.Ed.2d 412 (1990), as requiring legislative authorization for a DWI roadblock. | 1 | 1993–1993 |
Drake v. Muse, Currie & Kohen
green
1 sentence1976The point upon which we disagree with the Court of Civil Appeals is its statement that Holt, as administratrix, had a right to appeal the will contest suit in her representative capacity, “as an interested party.” 2 532 S.W.2d at 373 . | 1 | 1976–1976 |
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.