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 1996–2025 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 |
|---|---|---|
Fibreboard Corp. v. Poolgreen2 sentences2007See Fibreboard Corp. v. Pool, 813 S.W.2d 658, 691-92 (Tex.App. — Texarkana 1991, writ denied). 2007See Fibreboard Corp. v. Pool, 813 S.W.2d 658, 691-92 (Tex.App. — Texarkana 1991, writ denied). | 2 | 2 |
Taylor v. Stategreen1 sentence2019See Taylor, 131 S.W.3d at 502 . 1 Accordingly, we modify the trial court’s judgment to delete the imposition of the $1,150.00 fine and affirm the judgment as modified. | 1 | 1 |
City of Keller v. Wilsongreen1 sentence2010See City of Keller v. Wilson , 168 S.W.3d 802, 823 (Tex. 2005) (holding that standard of review for legal sufficiency challenge applies to review of directed verdict); Prudential Ins. | 1 | 1 |
Jamar v. Pattersongreen1 sentence1996The court of appeals relied on Arndt v. Arndt, 709 S.W.2d 281, 282 (Tex.App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 1986, no writ), in which the court stated in dicta that a motion for new trial “will not act to extend the appellate timetables if the required $15 fee is not paid before the motion is heard or before it is overruled.” Subsequently, in Jamar v. Patterson, 868 S.W.2d 318, 319 (Tex.1993), we held that a motion for new trial tendered without the necessary filing fee is nonetheless conditionally filed when it is presented to the clerk, and that date controls for purposes of the appellate timetable. | 1 | 1 |
Arndt v. Arndtgreen2 sentences1996The court of appeals relied on Arndt v. Arndt, 709 S.W.2d 281, 282 (Tex.App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 1986, no writ), in which the court stated in dicta that a motion for new trial “will not act to extend the appellate timetables if the required $15 fee is not paid before the motion is heard or before it is overruled.” Subsequently, in Jamar v. Patterson, 868 S.W.2d 318, 319 (Tex.1993), we held that a motion for new trial tendered without the necessary filing fee is nonetheless conditionally filed when it is presented to the clerk, and that date controls for purposes of the appellate timetable. 1996On DuPont’s motion, the court of appeals dismissed the appeal for want of jurisdiction, holding that Tate’s motion for new trial did not extend the appellate timetable because she did not pay the required filing fee until after the motion had been overruled by operation of law. 709 S.W.2d at 282 . | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Texas. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
United States v. Rahimi
red
1 sentence2025But a year into this litigation, Tate’s second amended motion purported to request “modification”: Movant herein requests this honorable Court modify … the previously issued protective order to restore Movant[’]s Second Amendment right to possess a firearm, as is consistent with recent federal precedent[1], to 1 Tate’s motion provided no citation, but this was surely a reference to the Fifth Circuit’s then-recent opinion in United States v. Rahimi, 61 F.4th 443 (5th Cir. 2023). | 1 | 2025–2025 |
Poindexter v. State
red
2 sentences2023Id. at 414 (citing Jackson, 443 U.S. at 318–19). 2023Id. at 414 (citing Jackson, 443 U.S. at 318–19). | 1 | 2023–2023 |
Jackson v. Virginia
red
2 sentences2023Id. at 414 (citing Jackson, 443 U.S. at 318–19). 2023Id. at 414 (citing Jackson, 443 U.S. at 318–19). | 1 | 2023–2023 |
Watson v. State
green
1 sentence2021Watson, 974 S.W.2d at 765 . | 1 | 2021–2021 |
Tate v. State
green
1 sentence1999Id. | 1 | 1999–1999 |
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.