restricted rule (Texas) · Go Syfert
← Texas issues

restricted rule in Texas

7 Texas opinions name it 1 courts 1911–2019 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 (3)

CaseFollowedCited
National Industrial Sand Ass'n v. Gibsongreen
tex · 1995 · cited in 1 Texas opinions naming this issue, 2019–2019
1 sentence

2019Sand Ass’n v. Gibson, 897 S.W.2d 769, 773 (Tex. 1995) (orig. proceeding);7 see also Bell, 7 In Gibson, the court restricted its inquiry to whether National Industrial Sand Association (NISA) “itself purposefully established minimum contacts such as would satisfy due process” and concluded that it had not, under either specific or general jurisdiction theories, when the undisputed evidence showed that NISA was not and 13 549 S.W.3d at 560 (“The mere existence or allegation of a conspiracy directed at Texas is not sufficient to confer jurisdiction.”).

11
Old Republic Nat'l Title Ins. Co. v. Bellgreen
tex · 2018 · cited in 1 Texas opinions naming this issue, 2019–2019
1 sentence

2019Sand Ass’n v. Gibson, 897 S.W.2d 769, 773 (Tex. 1995) (orig. proceeding);7 see also Bell, 7 In Gibson, the court restricted its inquiry to whether National Industrial Sand Association (NISA) “itself purposefully established minimum contacts such as would satisfy due process” and concluded that it had not, under either specific or general jurisdiction theories, when the undisputed evidence showed that NISA was not and 13 549 S.W.3d at 560 (“The mere existence or allegation of a conspiracy directed at Texas is not sufficient to confer jurisdiction.”).

11
Long v. Knoxgreen
tex · 1956 · cited in 1 Texas opinions naming this issue, 2012–2012
2 sentences

2012In reversing our decision in Ferguson, the Texas Supreme Court did not expressly disapprove of our application of federal law, but the Court restricted its analysis to the elements of judicial estoppel as stated in Pleasant Glade Assembly of God v. Schubert, 264 S.W.3d 1 (Tex.2008) and Long v. Knox, 155 Tex. 581 , 291 S.W.2d 292, 295 (1956).

2012In reversing our decision in Ferguson, the Texas Supreme Court did not expressly disapprove of our application of federal law, but the Court restricted its analysis to the elements of judicial estoppel as stated in Pleasant Glade Assembly of God v. Schubert, 264 S.W.3d 1 (Tex.2008) and Long v. Knox, 155 Tex. 581 , 291 S.W.2d 292, 295 (1956).

11

Distinguished, questioned or overruled (0)

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

Also cited on this issue (8)

CaseCitedYears
State v. Barbernell green
texcrimapp · 2008
1 sentence

2015State v. Barbernell, 257 S.W.3d at 250 .

12015–2015
Ferguson v. Building Materials Corp. of America green
tex · 2009
1 sentence

2012Ferguson, 295 S.W.3d at 643-44 .

12012–2012
Pleasant Glade Assembly of God v. Schubert green
tex · 2008
1 sentence

2012In reversing our decision in Ferguson, the Texas Supreme Court did not expressly disapprove of our application of federal law, but the Court restricted its analysis to the elements of judicial estoppel as stated in Pleasant Glade Assembly of God v. Schubert, 264 S.W.3d 1 (Tex.2008) and Long v. Knox, 155 Tex. 581 , 291 S.W.2d 292, 295 (1956).

12012–2012
Ricker, Lee & Co. v. Shoemaker green
· 1891
1 sentence

1946The last cited case follows the rule announced in Ricker v. Shoemaker, supra, rather than the less restricted rule announced in Hill v. Kimball, supra; in the Meredith case, supra, the court held that “trespass” as used in exception 9 to Article 1995 “was intended to embrace only actions for such injuries as result from wrongful acts willfully or negligently committed, and not those which result from a mere omission to do a duty.” *950 It is not contended in this appeal that the wrongful acts attributed to defendants were done with 'a wilful intent to injure plaintiff’s child, but that the act

11946–1946
Riggins v. Thompson green
tex · 1902
1 sentence

1932It has been suggested that in Riggins v. Thompson [ 98 Tex. 154 , 71 S. W. 14 ], supra, the Supreme Court held that, where the trial judge or court granted an injunction permanent in its character, the appellate court could reform the judgment and make the injunction temporary in its effect.

11932–1932
H. & T. C. R'y Co. v. Sympkins neutral
tex · 1881
1 sentence

1913The rule announced in Railway v. Sympkins, 54 Tex. 615 , 38 Am.

11913–1913
Missouri, Kansas & Texas Railway Co. v. Malone neutral
tex · 1909
2 sentences

1913No higher degree of care is demanded by the charge than a “reasonable lookout for pedestrians at said time and place.” It surely cannot be maintained that the employes on a train passing through a town about 8 o’clock in the evening, at a place habitually used by pedestrians and at a rapid rate of speed, are not required to keep a “reasonable lookout for pedestrians at said time and place.” Even under the narrow and restricted rule enunciated by the Supreme Court in Railway v. Malone, 102 Tex. 269 , 115 S. W. 1158 , which holds that no duty arises to keep watch by night in passing a bridge whi

1913No higher degree of care is demanded by the charge than a “reasonable lookout for pedestrians at said time and place.” It surely cannot be maintained that the employes on a train passing through a town about 8 o’clock in the evening, at a place habitually used by pedestrians and at a rapid rate of speed, are not required to keep a “reasonable lookout for pedestrians at said time and place.” Even under the narrow and restricted rule enunciated by the Supreme Court in Railway v. Malone, 102 Tex. 269 , 115 S. W. 1158 , which holds that no duty arises to keep watch by night in passing a bridge whi

11913–1913
United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co. v. Fossati neutral
· 1904
2 sentences

1911But the later case of U. S. Fidelity & Guaranty Co. v. Fossati, 97 Tex. 497 , 80 S. W. 74 , lays down a more restricted rule.

1911But the later case of U. S. Fidelity & Guaranty Co. v. Fossati, 97 Tex. 497 , 80 S. W. 74 , lays down a more restricted rule.

11911–1911

Where else courts name it

CA 8 (1947–2022) NY 7 (1890–2009) TX 7 (1911–2019) PA 6 (1954–2001) MN 5 (1890–1983) NE 5 (1895–1989) WA 4 (1913–2015) OH 4 (1988–2016) MS 4 (1950–2012) MD 3 (1966–1995) OK 3 (2017–2017) ME 3 (1853–2015) HI 3 (1923–1997) CT 3 (2002–2019) KY 2 (1888–1925) FL 2 (1939–1987) AL 2 (1930–2004) AZ 2 (1992–2017) IA 2 (1967–2009)

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