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 1 courts 2007–2018 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 |
|---|---|---|
Dolenz v. Boundygreen2 sentences2018See, e.g., Robson, 267 S.W.3d at 407 (upholding a finding of bad faith where attorney asserted a groundless claim against defendant and failed to conduct a reasonable inquiry into the facts before filing an amended petition); Dolenz v. Boundy, 197 S.W.3d 416, 422 (Tex. App.—Dallas 2006, pet. denied) (upholding a finding that attorney acted in bad faith by filing a pleading that was clearly barred by the statute of limitations, noting that the attorney should have been aware that there were no tolling provisions applicable to his attorney’s case); Skepnek, 8 S.W.3d at 383 (record supported an i 2012Where a reasonable inquiry would have revealed that a claim was barred by the applicable statute of limitations, the claim is groundless. 89 See McDougal, 251 S.W.3d at 718 (noting that a time-barred claim is a groundless claim where a reasonable inquiry would have revealed the claim was time-barred); Dolenz v. Boundy, 197 S.W.3d 416, 422 (Tex.App.-Dallas 2006, pet. denied) (affirming sanctions where plaintiff “was aware of the applicable statute of limitations”). 73) Additionally, many of Nath’s defamation allegations consisted of statements that were, on their face, nondefamatory. | 2 | 2 |
Lopez, Dan v. RS Clark & Associates, Incgreen2 sentences2015See Lope z v. RS Clark & Assocs., Inc., 396 S.W.3d 656, 657 (Tex.App. — Dallas 2013, no pet.) (on motion to review order requiring additional security to supersede judg-. ment).. 2015See Lopez v. RS Clark & Assocs., Inc., 396 S.W.3d 656, 657 (Tex. App.— Dallas 2013, no pet.) (on motion to review order requiring additional security to supersede judgment). | 2 | 2 |
Smith v. Denevegreen2 sentences2013See id. 2013See id. | 2 | 2 |
Skepnek v. Mynattgreen1 sentence2018See, e.g., Robson, 267 S.W.3d at 407 (upholding a finding of bad faith where attorney asserted a groundless claim against defendant and failed to conduct a reasonable inquiry into the facts before filing an amended petition); Dolenz v. Boundy, 197 S.W.3d 416, 422 (Tex. App.—Dallas 2006, pet. denied) (upholding a finding that attorney acted in bad faith by filing a pleading that was clearly barred by the statute of limitations, noting that the attorney should have been aware that there were no tolling provisions applicable to his attorney’s case); Skepnek, 8 S.W.3d at 383 (record supported an i | 1 | 1 |
Robson v. Gilbreathgreen1 sentence2018See, e.g., Robson, 267 S.W.3d at 407 (upholding a finding of bad faith where attorney asserted a groundless claim against defendant and failed to conduct a reasonable inquiry into the facts before filing an amended petition); Dolenz v. Boundy, 197 S.W.3d 416, 422 (Tex. App.—Dallas 2006, pet. denied) (upholding a finding that attorney acted in bad faith by filing a pleading that was clearly barred by the statute of limitations, noting that the attorney should have been aware that there were no tolling provisions applicable to his attorney’s case); Skepnek, 8 S.W.3d at 383 (record supported an i | 1 | 1 |
Delgado v. Methodist Hospitalgreen2 sentences2012See Delgado, 936 S.W.2d at 487-88 (finding IIED claim groundless and filed in bad faith where plaintiff presented no evidence of “extreme and outrageous” conduct). 62)Before imposing Rule 13 sanctions on the basis of groundlessness, the trial court must also determine that the groundless claim was filed in bad faith or for the purpose of harassment. 2012See Delgado, 936 S.W.2d at 487-88 (finding IIED claim groundless and filed in bad faith where plaintiff presented no evidence of “extreme and outrageous” conduct). 65) Before imposing Rule 13 sanctions on the basis of groundlessness, the trial court must also determine that the groundless claim was filed in bad faith or for the purpose of harassment. | 1 | 1 |
Thottumkal v. McDougalgreen2 sentences2012Where a reasonable inquiry would have revealed that a claim was barred by the applicable statute of limitations, the claim is groundless. 89 See McDougal, 251 S.W.3d at 718 (noting that a time-barred claim is a groundless claim where a reasonable inquiry would have revealed the claim was time-barred); Dolenz v. Boundy, 197 S.W.3d 416, 422 (Tex.App.-Dallas 2006, pet. denied) (affirming sanctions where plaintiff “was aware of the applicable statute of limitations”). 73) Additionally, many of Nath’s defamation allegations consisted of statements that were, on their face, nondefamatory. 2012Where a reasonable inquiry would have revealed that a claim was barred by the applicable statute of limitations, the claim is groundless and/or lacks evidentiary support. 96 See McDougal, 251 S.W.3d at 718 (noting that a time-barred claim is a groundless claim where a reasonable inquiry would have revealed the claim was time-barred); Dolenz v. Boundy, 197 S.W.3d 416, 422 (Tex.App.-Dallas 2006, pet. denied) (affirming sanctions where plaintiff “was aware of the applicable statute of limitations”). 76) Additionally, many of Nath’s defamation allegations consisted of statements that were, on thei | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Texas. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Hartman v. Urban
green
1 sentence2007Id. at 552 . | 1 | 2007–2007 |
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.