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.
7 Texas opinions name it 2 courts 2009–2023 2 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 |
|---|---|---|
Snyder v. Pittsgreen2 sentences2023See Snyder, 241 S.W.2d at 141 . 2023See Snyder, 241 S.W.2d at 141 . | 2 | 2 |
Bankers Standard Life Ins. Co. v. Atwoodgreen1 sentence2009Co. v. Atwood, 205 S.W.2d 74, 77 (Tex.Civ.App.-Austin 1947, no writ) (same as Hunter); Spears Dairy v. Davis, 125 S.W.2d 382, 383 (Tex.Civ.App.-Beaumont 1939, no writ) (same as Hunter and stating that party is required to object to the conditioning instruction and to anticipate that jury may answer initial question in such a way that it fails to answer subsequent questions that are improperly conditioned on the jury's answer to the initial question). . | 1 | 1 |
Spencer v. Eagle Star Insurance Co. of Americagreen1 sentence2009See 876 S.W.2d 154, 157 (Tex. 1994) (holding that trial court erred in rendering take-nothing judgment notwithstanding jury's verdict in favor of plaintiff based on defendant's properly preserved charge error and concluding that proper remedy was for trial court to grant new trial based on the charge error). [50] Hugel testified by videotaped deposition that he was the founder of "Gulf Coast Marine," which owns all of the stock in "Ocean Marine." He further testified, "The insurance company was Ocean Marine Indemnity Company. | 1 | 1 |
Spears Dairy v. Davisgreen2 sentences2009Co. v. Atwood, 205 S.W.2d 74, 77 (Tex.Civ.App.-Austin 1947, no writ) (same as Hunter); Spears Dairy v. Davis, 125 S.W.2d 382, 383 (Tex.Civ.App.-Beaumont 1939, no writ) (same as Hunter and stating that party is required to object to the conditioning instruction and to anticipate that jury may answer initial question in such a way that it fails to answer subsequent questions that are improperly conditioned on the jury's answer to the initial question). . 2009App.-Austin 1947, no writ) (same as Hunter ); Spears Dairy v. Davis, 125 S.W.2d 382, 383 (Tex.Civ.App.-Beaumont 1939, no writ) (same as Hunter and stating that party is required to object to the conditioning instruction and to anticipate that jury may answer initial question in such a way that it fails to answer subsequent questions that are improperly conditioned on the jury's answer to the initial question). [49] The Insureds rely on Spencer v. Eagle Star Insurance Co. of America; however, Spencer is not on point because it did not involve a conditional submission and because an objection wa | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Texas. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Melodie McFarland and Pamela Lykes v. Stacie Boisseau
green
2 sentences2018This court noted that error was preserved because the “trial court clearly understood the [plaintiffs’] complaint and this is all that was required.” Id. at 510 . 2018This court noted that error was preserved because the “trial court clearly understood the [plaintiffs’] complaint and this is all that was required.” Id. at 510 . | 2 | 2018–2018 |
Environmental Procedures, Inc. v. Guidry
green
1 sentence2016No Waiver Due to Conditioning Language Citing this court’s opinion in Environmental Procedures, Inc. v. Guidry, 282 S.W.3d 602 (Tex.App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 2009, pet. denied), and the cases cited therein, Nadia contends “it'is well established in Texas law that an appellant waives any objection to the trial court’s failure to include a proper conditioning instruction by failing to either object or to tender a proper instruction during the charge conference.” We disagree with Nadia’s interpretation of Guidry and the related authorities. | 1 | 2016–2016 |
Little Rock Furniture Manufacturing Co. v. Dunn
green
2 sentences2012Co. v. Dunn, 148 Tex. 197 , 203–04, 222 S.W.2d 985 , 989–90 (1949) (holding party that failed to object to instruction conditioning submission of jury question on answer to previous question waived right to finding as to subsequent question and answer must be deemed found in 34 that we have found involved a conditional submission of a distinct claim or theory as contrasted with an element of a single theory. 2012Co. v. Dunn, 148 Tex. 197 , 203–04, 222 S.W.2d 985 , 989–90 (1949) (holding party that failed to object to instruction conditioning submission of jury question on answer to previous question waived right to finding as to subsequent question and answer must be deemed found in 34 that we have found involved a conditional submission of a distinct claim or theory as contrasted with an element of a single theory. | 1 | 2012–2012 |
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.