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 2 courts 2010–2025 3 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 |
|---|---|---|
Southwestern Bell Telephone Co. v. Marketing on Hold Inc.green2 sentences2025As the Court explained, “[b]ecause STA holds . . . valid assignments, STA steps into the shoes of the claim- holders.” Id. 2025In rejecting Southwestern Bell’s argument, the Court noted that “[b]ecause STA holds contractually valid assignments, STA steps into the shoes of the claim-holders and is considered under the law to have suffered the same injury as the assignors and have the same ability to pursue the claims.” Id. at 916 . (citing Holy Cross Church of God in Christ v. Wolf, 44 S.W.3d 562, 572 (Tex. 2001) and Stevens, 529 U.S. at 773 ). | 5 | 7 |
HOLY CROSS CHURCH OF GOD IN CHRIST v. Wolfgreen2 sentences2025In rejecting Southwestern Bell’s argument, the Court noted that “[b]ecause STA holds contractually valid assignments, STA steps into the shoes of the claim-holders and is considered under the law to have suffered the same injury as the assignors and have the same ability to pursue the claims.” Id. at 916 . (citing Holy Cross Church of God in Christ v. Wolf, 44 S.W.3d 562, 572 (Tex. 2001) and Stevens, 529 U.S. at 773 ). 2025In rejecting this argument, this Court noted that “[b]ecause STA holds contractually valid assignments, STA steps into the shoes of the claim-holders and is considered under the law to have suffered the same injury as the assignors and have the same ability to pursue the claims.” Id. at 916. (citing Holy Cross Church of God in Christ v. Wolf, 44 S.W.3d 562, 572 (Tex. 2001) and Stevens, 529 U.S. at 773). | 3 | 3 |
Jackson v. Thweattgreen2 sentences2011Co. v. Marketing on Hold Inc., 308 S.W.3d 909, 916 (Tex.2010) (holding that because class action representative held contractually valid assignments, representative stepped “into the shoes of the claim-holders and is considered under the law to have suffered the same injury as the assignors and have the same ability to pursue the claims”); Jackson v. Thweatt, 883 S.W.2d 171, 174 (Tex.1994) (“[A]n as-signee receives the full rights of the assignor. ...”). 2011Co. v. Marketing on Hold Inc., 308 S.W.3d 909, 916 (Tex. 2010) (holding that because class action representative held contractually valid assignments, representative stepped “into the shoes of the claim-holders and is considered under the law to have suffered the same injury as the assignors and have the same ability to pursue the claims”); Jackson v. Thweatt, 883 S.W.2d 171, 174 (Tex. 1994) (“[A]n assignee receives the full rights of the assignor . . . .”). | 2 | 2 |
Vermont Agency of Natural Resources v. United States Ex Rel. Stevensgreen2 sentences2025In rejecting Southwestern Bell’s argument, the Court noted that “[b]ecause STA holds contractually valid assignments, STA steps into the shoes of the claim-holders and is considered under the law to have suffered the same injury as the assignors and have the same ability to pursue the claims.” Id. at 916 . (citing Holy Cross Church of God in Christ v. Wolf, 44 S.W.3d 562, 572 (Tex. 2001) and Stevens, 529 U.S. at 773 ). 2025In rejecting this argument, this Court noted that “[b]ecause STA holds contractually valid assignments, STA steps into the shoes of the claim-holders and is considered under the law to have suffered the same injury as the assignors and have the same ability to pursue the claims.” Id. at 916. (citing Holy Cross Church of God in Christ v. Wolf, 44 S.W.3d 562, 572 (Tex. 2001) and Stevens, 529 U.S. at 773). | 1 | 2 |
Lehmann v. Har-Con Corp.red1 sentence2019Lehmann v. Har-Con Corp, 39 S.W.3d 191, 195 (Tex. 2001) (citing N.E. | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Texas. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
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.