7 Texas opinions name it 3 courts 1935–2013 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 |
|---|---|---|
ST. LUKE'S EPISCOPAL HOSPITAL v. Marksgreen1 sentence2013Brittingham-Sada de Ayala v. Mackie, 193 S.W.3d 575, 578 (Tex.2006). | 1 | 1 |
Nelson v. Stategreen1 sentence1980In that situation, it is legitimate to prove that the witness had been ‘in trouble’ on occasions other than those about which he offered direct testimony.” 503 S.W.2d at 545 [emphasis added]. | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Texas. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Smith v. State
green
1 sentence2013Id. at 50–51. | 1 | 2013–2013 |
Ortiz v. Great Southern Fire & Casualty Insurance Co.
green
2 sentences1996The Court correctly states the principle that “[a]n insurer is not entitled to [equitable] subrogation if the insured’s loss is in excess of the amounts recovered from the insurer and the third party causing the loss.” 927 S.W.2d at 604 (quoting Ortiz, 597 S.W.2d at 343 ). 1996The Court correctly states the principle that "[a]n insurer is not entitled to [equitable] subrogation if the insured's loss is in excess of the amounts recovered from the insurer and the third party causing the loss." 927 S.W.2d at 604 (quoting Ortiz, 597 S.W.2d at 343 ). | 1 | 1996–1996 |
Medina v. Herrera
green
2 sentences1996The Court correctly states the principle that “[a]n insurer is not entitled to [equitable] subrogation if the insured’s loss is in excess of the amounts recovered from the insurer and the third party causing the loss.” 927 S.W.2d at 604 (quoting Ortiz, 597 S.W.2d at 343 ). 1996The Court correctly states the principle that "[a]n insurer is not entitled to [equitable] subrogation if the insured's loss is in excess of the amounts recovered from the insurer and the third party causing the loss." 927 S.W.2d at 604 (quoting Ortiz, 597 S.W.2d at 343 ). | 1 | 1996–1996 |
cluster 451919
green
1 sentence1994Gideon v. Johns-Manville Sales Corp., 761 F.2d 1129 (5th Cir.1985). | 1 | 1994–1994 |
Thomas Lonergan v. San Antonio Trust Co.
green
2 sentences1963This equity was converted to cash and the cash paid into the registry of the court as aforesaid, and the court correctly applied the doctrine of Lonergan v. San Antonio Loan & Trust Co., 101 Tex. 63 , 104 S.W. 1061 , in holding, that appellees were not entitled to liens on appellants’ homestead, but only to the unpaid balance of the contract price which would otherwise be owing to McElyea, as if appellees had sued out writs of garnishment against appellants, subject of course to the right of appellants first to deduct the cost of completing the house. 1963This equity was converted to cash and the cash paid into the registry of the court as aforesaid, and the court correctly applied the doctrine of Lonergan v. San Antonio Loan & Trust Co., 101 Tex. 63 , 104 S.W. 1061 , in holding, that appellees were not entitled to liens on appellants’ homestead, but only to the unpaid balance of the contract price which would otherwise be owing to McElyea, as if appellees had sued out writs of garnishment against appellants, subject of course to the right of appellants first to deduct the cost of completing the house. | 1 | 1963–1963 |
Dallas Ry. & Terminal Co. v. Allen
neutral
1 sentence1935Judge Looney of this court correctly states the rule in Dallas Railway & Terminal Co. v. Allen, 43 S.W. (2d) 165, 170 , in which he said: “The rule is well settled that no presumption will be indulged, from finding of the jury on affirmative and defensive issues of negligence, that the jury might not have found differently, on the issue of accident, if submitted distinctly and separately. [Citing authorities.]” Under the facts of this case, as viewed by the majority of this court, they not being in accord with the writer’s views conclude that this assignment should be overruled; but are inclin | 1 | 1935–1935 |
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.