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 1973–2022 1 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 |
|---|---|---|
Johnson v. United Statesgreen2 sentences2017See Johnson v. State, 520 U.S. 461, 466 , 117 S.Ct. 1544 , 137 L.Ed.2d 718 (1997) ("the seriousness of the error claimed does not remove consideration of it from the ambit of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure"). 2017See Johnson v. State, 520 U.S. 461, 466 (1997) (“the seriousness of the error claimed does not remove consideration of it from the ambit of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure”). | 1 | 1 |
Andrews v. Kochgreen1 sentence2014Andrews v. Koch, 702 S.W.2d 584, 585 (Tex. 1986). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Texas. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Texas Ass'n of Business v. Texas Air Control Board
green
2 sentences2015No claim to original U.S. Government Works. 16 Texas Ass'n of Business v. Texas Air Control Bd., 852 S.W.2d 440 (1993) Requiring that assessed penalties be paid, or a bond in the same amount be posted, prior to challenging the agency action in court is not unreasonable under these circumstances. 2015No claim to original U.S. Government Works. 16 Texas Ass'n of Business v. Texas Air Control Bd., 852 S.W.2d 440 (1993) Requiring that assessed penalties be paid, or a bond in the same amount be posted, prior to challenging the agency action in court is not unreasonable under these circumstances. | 2 | 2015–2015 |
in Re Volkswagen Clean Diesel Litigation: Texas Clean Air Act Enforcement Cases
green
1 sentence2022Tex. Gov’t Code § 571.177. 29 as the factfinder tasked with determining the “proper” penalty within the respective statutory ranges, see Villarreal, 2020 WL 6576158 , at *9; In re Volkswagen, 557 S.W.3d at 84–85—and here Section 571.173 places the initial assessment of a penalty within the Commission’s discretion—we fail to see why the determination of the amount of penalty, if any, would not become an issue for the jury when the statutory scheme expressly vacates the Commission’s order, affords the alleged violator a trial de novo, and requires a jury determination of all issues of fact on wh | 1 | 2022–2022 |
Burrow v. Arce
green
1 sentence2008Factors relevant in determining the seriousness of a violation include A the gravity and timing of the violation, its wilfulness, its effect on the value of the lawyer = s work for the client, any other threatened or actual harm to the client, and the adequacy of other remedies. @ Id. (quoting Restatement (Third) of the Law Governing Lawyers ' 49 (Proposed Final Draft No. 1, 1996)). | 1 | 2008–2008 |
Organization for a Better Austin v. Keefe
green
2 sentences1973Indeed, as was said in Organization for a Better Austin v. Keefe, 402 U.S. 415, 419 , 91 S.Ct. 1575, 1578 , 29 L.Ed.2d 1 (1971), any prior restraint on expression comes to the court with “a ‘heavy presumption’ against its constitutional validity.” In the annotation found in “Obscenity — -Procedures”, 5 A.L.R.3d 1214 , 1229 (1966), it is said, “Restraint by injunction has traditionally been thought to inhibit freedom of speech more seriously than restraint by penalties imposed after publication.” We appreciate the seriousness of the challenge against the restraint imposed by the trial court; an 1973Indeed, as was said in Organization for a Better Austin v. Keefe, 402 U.S. 415, 419 , 91 S.Ct. 1575, 1578 , 29 L.Ed.2d 1 (1971), any prior restraint on expression comes to the court with “a ‘heavy presumption’ against its constitutional validity.” In the annotation found in “Obscenity — -Procedures”, 5 A.L.R.3d 1214 , 1229 (1966), it is said, “Restraint by injunction has traditionally been thought to inhibit freedom of speech more seriously than restraint by penalties imposed after publication.” We appreciate the seriousness of the challenge against the restraint imposed by the trial court; an | 1 | 1973–1973 |
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.