did not commit error in Texas

7 Texas opinions name it 2 courts 1922–1974 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 (1)

Case	Followed	Cited
Spangler v. Stategreen texcrimapp · 1900 · cited in 1 Texas opinions naming this issue, 1936–1936 1 sentence 1936See Spangler v. State, 41 Texas Crim.	1	1

Distinguished, questioned or overruled (0)

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

Also cited on this issue (10)

Case	Cited	Years
Cherb v. State green texcrimapp · 1971 1 sentence 1974In Cherb v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 472 S.W.2d 273, 278 , we said: “The rule followed by this Court and other Texas courts is that if the witness unqualifiedly admits making the inconsistent statement, then further proof of the statement is error.	1	1974–1974
Texas Employers' Ins. Ass'n v. Pillow green texapp · 1954 1 sentence 1968Ass’n v. Pillow, Tex.Civ.App., 268 S.W.2d 716 , writ ref’d n. r. e.; 41 Tex.Jur.2d, New Trial, §§ 118 and 122.” Appellant failed to' show that he was entitled to a new trial on the grounds of newly discovered evidence and the court did not commit error in this respect.	1	1968–1968
Cook v. Peacock green texapp · 1941 1 sentence 1950Tracy v. Willacy County, Tex.Civ.App., 169 S.W.2d 217 ; Daniels v. U. S. Rubber Co., Tex.Civ.App., 199 S.W.2d 533 ; Cook v. Peacock, Tex.Civ.App., 154 S.W.2d 688 .	1	1950–1950
Tracy v. Willacy County neutral texapp · 1943 1 sentence 1950Tracy v. Willacy County, Tex.Civ.App., 169 S.W.2d 217 ; Daniels v. U. S. Rubber Co., Tex.Civ.App., 199 S.W.2d 533 ; Cook v. Peacock, Tex.Civ.App., 154 S.W.2d 688 .	1	1950–1950
Daniels v. United States Rubber Co. green texapp · 1946 1 sentence 1950Tracy v. Willacy County, Tex.Civ.App., 169 S.W.2d 217 ; Daniels v. U. S. Rubber Co., Tex.Civ.App., 199 S.W.2d 533 ; Cook v. Peacock, Tex.Civ.App., 154 S.W.2d 688 .	1	1950–1950
McKibban v. Scott neutral tex · 1938 2 sentences 1939Contestant cites and relies upon case of McKibban v. Scott, 131 Tex. 182 , 114 S.W. 2d 213 , 115 A.L.R. 1421 . 1939Contestant cites and relies upon case of McKibban v. Scott, 131 Tex. 182 , 114 S.W. 2d 213 , 115 A.L.R. 1421 .	1	1939–1939
Consolidated Underwriters v. Breedlove green tex · 1924 2 sentences 1926Lumbermen’s Reciprocal Association v. Behnken et al., 246 S. W. 72 , 112 Tex. 103 , and authorities cited; Kirby Lumber Co. v. Scurlock, 246 S. W. 76 , 112 Tex. 115 , and authorities cited; Consolidated Underwriters v. Breed-love, 265 S. W. 128 , 114 Tex. 172 ; Western Indemnity Co. v. Leonard (Tex. Com. 1926Lumbermen’s Reciprocal Association v. Behnken et al., 246 S. W. 72 , 112 Tex. 103 , and authorities cited; Kirby Lumber Co. v. Scurlock, 246 S. W. 76 , 112 Tex. 115 , and authorities cited; Consolidated Underwriters v. Breed-love, 265 S. W. 128 , 114 Tex. 172 ; Western Indemnity Co. v. Leonard (Tex. Com.	1	1926–1926
Lumberman's Reciprocal Ass'n. v. Behnken green · 1922 2 sentences 1926Lumbermen’s Reciprocal Association v. Behnken et al., 246 S. W. 72 , 112 Tex. 103 , and authorities cited; Kirby Lumber Co. v. Scurlock, 246 S. W. 76 , 112 Tex. 115 , and authorities cited; Consolidated Underwriters v. Breed-love, 265 S. W. 128 , 114 Tex. 172 ; Western Indemnity Co. v. Leonard (Tex. Com. 1926Lumbermen’s Reciprocal Association v. Behnken et al., 246 S. W. 72 , 112 Tex. 103 , and authorities cited; Kirby Lumber Co. v. Scurlock, 246 S. W. 76 , 112 Tex. 115 , and authorities cited; Consolidated Underwriters v. Breed-love, 265 S. W. 128 , 114 Tex. 172 ; Western Indemnity Co. v. Leonard (Tex. Com.	1	1926–1926
Kirby Lumber Co. v. Scurlock green · 1922 2 sentences 1926Lumbermen’s Reciprocal Association v. Behnken et al., 246 S. W. 72 , 112 Tex. 103 , and authorities cited; Kirby Lumber Co. v. Scurlock, 246 S. W. 76 , 112 Tex. 115 , and authorities cited; Consolidated Underwriters v. Breed-love, 265 S. W. 128 , 114 Tex. 172 ; Western Indemnity Co. v. Leonard (Tex. Com. 1926Lumbermen’s Reciprocal Association v. Behnken et al., 246 S. W. 72 , 112 Tex. 103 , and authorities cited; Kirby Lumber Co. v. Scurlock, 246 S. W. 76 , 112 Tex. 115 , and authorities cited; Consolidated Underwriters v. Breed-love, 265 S. W. 128 , 114 Tex. 172 ; Western Indemnity Co. v. Leonard (Tex. Com.	1	1926–1926
St. Louis & San Francisco Railroad v. Franklin green · 1909 1 sentence 1922Co. v. Franklin, 58 Tex. Civ.	1	1922–1922

Where else courts name it

OK 17 (1916–1983) MO 16 (1878–2019) CA 14 (1919–2023) IN 10 (1917–2013) IL 9 (1907–2023) AL 7 (1917–1978) NY 7 (1990–2026) TX 7 (1922–1974) GA 7 (1906–1979) MT 7 (1922–1987) FL 6 (1953–2002) NC 6 (1968–1985) AR 5 (1912–1980) CT 4 (1976–2021) ME 4 (2003–2019) OH 4 (1951–2026) OR 3 (1923–2021) AZ 2 (1923–1961) ND 2 (1938–1938) KY 2 (1968–1969) WA 2 (1938–1943) VT 2 (1936–1993) PA 2 (1949–2015)

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