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 1911–1934 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 |
|---|---|---|
| No positive-treatment citations attached to this issue in Texas. | ||
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Texas. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Bruce v. Washington
neutral
2 sentences1934Neither can we agree with plaintiff in error’s contention that the above-quoted questions and answers show that defendant in error’s claim was not hostile, and that it brings this ease within the doctrine announced in Holland v. Nance, 102 Tex. 177 , 114 S. W. 346 ; Bruce v. Washington, 80 Tex. 368 , 15 S. W. 1104 . 1934Neither can we agree with plaintiff in error’s contention that the above-quoted questions and answers show that defendant in error’s claim was not hostile, and that it brings this ease within the doctrine announced in Holland v. Nance, 102 Tex. 177 , 114 S. W. 346 ; Bruce v. Washington, 80 Tex. 368 , 15 S. W. 1104 . | 1 | 1934–1934 |
Holland v. Nance
neutral
1 sentence1934Neither can we agree with plaintiff in error’s contention that the above-quoted questions and answers show that defendant in error’s claim was not hostile, and that it brings this ease within the doctrine announced in Holland v. Nance, 102 Tex. 177 , 114 S. W. 346 ; Bruce v. Washington, 80 Tex. 368 , 15 S. W. 1104 . | 1 | 1934–1934 |
Houston Water Works v. Kennedy
green
2 sentences1932Such fact was essential to bring the ease within the rule contended for by appellant, which rule or principle is declared in cases like Houston Water-Works Co. v. Kennedy, 70 Tex. 233 , 8 S. W. 36 , and Lyles v. T. & N. O. 1932Such fact was essential to bring the ease within the rule contended for by appellant, which rule or principle is declared in cases like Houston Water-Works Co. v. Kennedy, 70 Tex. 233 , 8 S. W. 36 , and Lyles v. T. & N. O. | 1 | 1932–1932 |
Francis v. State
green
1 sentence1925Rep. 374 , 235 S. W. 580 , in which the statement is made that to come within the prohibition against an allusion to the failure of the defendant to testify the implication from the language must be a necessary one, one that could not reasonably be applied to his failure to produce other testimony than his own. | 1 | 1925–1925 |
Boone v. State
green
1 sentence1925This brings the ease within the principle announced in Boone v. State, 90 Texas Crim. | 1 | 1925–1925 |
Edwards v. Norton
green
1 sentence1920Permissive occupation by the father and mere expectation of a gift by the son will not bring the ease within the rule.” Several other authorities are cited which contain announcements substantially to the same effect as that quoted, such as Combest v. Wall, 102 S. W. 147 ; Martin v. Martin, 207 S. W. 189 ; Snover v. Jones, 172 S. W. 1123 ; Edwards v. Norton, 48 Tex. 291 ; Meurin v. Kopplin, 100 S. W. 984 ; Zallmanzig v. Zallmanzig, 24 S. W. 944 ; Doyle v. First National Bank of Wamego, 50 S. W. 480 ; 36 Cyc. 689, 691. | 1 | 1920–1920 |
Galveston, H. & S. A. Ry. Co. v. Itule
neutral
1 sentence1920Permissive occupation by the father and mere expectation of a gift by the son will not bring the ease within the rule.” Several other authorities are cited which contain announcements substantially to the same effect as that quoted, such as Combest v. Wall, 102 S. W. 147 ; Martin v. Martin, 207 S. W. 189 ; Snover v. Jones, 172 S. W. 1123 ; Edwards v. Norton, 48 Tex. 291 ; Meurin v. Kopplin, 100 S. W. 984 ; Zallmanzig v. Zallmanzig, 24 S. W. 944 ; Doyle v. First National Bank of Wamego, 50 S. W. 480 ; 36 Cyc. 689, 691. | 1 | 1920–1920 |
Caven v. Coleman
neutral
2 sentences1914App. 292 , 111 S. W. 1078, that the laws did not apply to the city of Galveston, which is governed like the city of Dallas by commissioners, for the reasons: First, that it did not have the officers named in the general laws which should constitute the membership of the examining and supervising board, which brought the ease within the rule in Caven v. Coleman, 100 Tex. 467 , 101 S. W. 199 ; and, second, because “the city of Galveston is expressly authorized by its charter ‘to regulate and control plumbers and plumbing works, and to enforce efficiency,’ ” and there being no general law upon th 1914App. 292 , 111 S. W. 1078, that the laws did not apply to the city of Galveston, which is governed like the city of Dallas by commissioners, for the reasons: First, that it did not have the officers named in the general laws which should constitute the membership of the examining and supervising board, which brought the ease within the rule in Caven v. Coleman, 100 Tex. 467 , 101 S. W. 199 ; and, second, because “the city of Galveston is expressly authorized by its charter ‘to regulate and control plumbers and plumbing works, and to enforce efficiency,’ ” and there being no general law upon th | 1 | 1914–1914 |
Shannon v. State
green
1 sentence1912We are of opinion that this record does not bring the ease within the rule laid down in Shannon v. State, 35 Texas Crim. | 1 | 1912–1912 |
Smith v. Western Union Telegraph Co.
green
2 sentences1911The case of Smith v. Telegraph Co., 84 Tex. 359 , 19 S. W. 441 , 31 Am. 1911The case of Smith v. Telegraph Co., 84 Tex. 359 , 19 S. W. 441 , 31 Am. | 1 | 1911–1911 |
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.