cases support rule (Texas) · Go Syfert
← Texas issues

cases support rule in Texas

7 Texas opinions name it 2 courts 1913–1946 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.

Followed or applied (0)

CaseFollowedCited
No positive-treatment citations attached to this issue in Texas.

Distinguished, questioned or overruled (0)

CaseNegativeCited
No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Texas. Read the followed side critically anyway.

Also cited on this issue (10)

CaseCitedYears
Cook v. Houston Direct Navigation Co. green
tex · 1890
2 sentences

1919Co., 76 Tex. 353 , 13 S. W. 475 , 18 Am.

1919Co., 76 Tex. 353 , 13 S. W. 475 , 18 Am.

21915–1919
Texas Traction Co. v. Nenney neutral
texapp · 1915
1 sentence

1946Other fault on the. part of the injured trainman is similarly a ground for denying a recovery, provided it is of itself the efficient cause of the injury.” The following cases support the test: Texas, Traction Co. v. Nenney, Tex.Civ.App., 178 S.W. 797 , error refused; Inter *284 national & G.

11946–1946
Georgia Casualty Co. v. Griesenbeck neutral
texapp · 1919
1 sentence

1928App.) 210 S. W. 273 ; 2Etna Ins.

11928–1928
Supreme Lodge, Knights of Pythias v. Wilson neutral
texapp · 1918
1 sentence

1926App.) 204 S. W. 891, 895 , par. 5; Sovereign Camp, W.

11926–1926
County of Franklin v. Layman neutral
ill · 1893
2 sentences

1923While there is considerable conflict between the decisions of the courts of other states on thé issue under consideration, the following cases support the rule announced in the Texas eases above cited: County of Franklin v. Layman, 145 Ill., 138, 145-6 , 33 N. E., 1094 ; County of Vermilion v. Knight, 1 Scammon (Ill.) 97, 99, 101-2; Duluth, etc. Ry.

1923While there is considerable conflict between the decisions of the courts of other states on thé issue under consideration, the following cases support the rule announced in the Texas eases above cited: County of Franklin v. Layman, 145 Ill., 138, 145-6 , 33 N. E., 1094 ; County of Vermilion v. Knight, 1 Scammon (Ill.) 97, 99, 101-2; Duluth, etc. Ry.

11923–1923
Lockyear v. Board of Commissioners neutral
ind · 1913
1 sentence

1923Co. v. Douglass County, 103 Wis., 75, 78-9 , 79 N. W., 34 ; Lockyear v. Board of Commissioners, 180 Ind., 464 , Ann.

11923–1923
Duluth, South Shore & Atlantic Railway Co. v. Douglas County green
wis · 1899
2 sentences

1923Co. v. Douglass County, 103 Wis., 75, 78-9 , 79 N. W., 34 ; Lockyear v. Board of Commissioners, 180 Ind., 464 , Ann.

1923Co. v. Douglass County, 103 Wis., 75, 78-9 , 79 N. W., 34 ; Lockyear v. Board of Commissioners, 180 Ind., 464 , Ann.

11923–1923
St. Louis Southwestern Railway Co. v. Jacobson green
texapp · 1902
1 sentence

1913App. 492 , 77 S. W. 272 ; Gehring v. Galveston Electric Co., 134 S. W. 291; Railway Co. v. Jacobson, 28 Tex. Civ.

11913–1913
International & Great Northern Railway Co. v. Wear neutral
texapp · 1903
2 sentences

1913App. 608 , 79 S. W. 639 , and authorities cited.” The following cases support this rule: Railway Co. v. Wear, 33 Tex. Civ.

1913App. 492 , 77 S. W. 272 ; Gehring v. Galveston Electric Co., 134 S. W. 291; Railway Co. v. Jacobson, 28 Tex. Civ.

11913–1913
Galveston City Railway Company v. Hanna neutral
texapp · 1904
1 sentence

1913App. 608 , 79 S. W. 639 , and authorities cited.” The following cases support this rule: Railway Co. v. Wear, 33 Tex. Civ.

11913–1913

Where else courts name it

OR 10 (1898–2018) OK 10 (1907–1954) NE 9 (1923–1956) TX 7 (1913–1946) CA 6 (1930–1949) WA 6 (1921–1946) NM 5 (1915–1986) NY 4 (1901–1928) MI 4 (1892–1978) TN 4 (1911–1984) IA 3 (1874–1924) FL 3 (1953–1974) IN 3 (1921–1932) IL 3 (1897–1910) UT 3 (1930–1989) NC 3 (1896–1971) MN 2 (1901–1916) MT 2 (1915–1958) ID 2 (1937–1952) AZ 2 (1923–1975) MS 2 (1942–1966) LA 2 (1960–1960)

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.

← Caselaw search · G Cite Topics · Brief Check