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 1985–2014 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 |
|---|---|---|
Jackson v. Stategreen2 sentences2008Cf. Jackson, 989 S.W.2d at 846 ("there is no evidence in the record reflecting sentences imposed for similar offenses on criminals in Texas or other jurisdictions by which to make a comparison"). 2008Cf. Jackson , 989 S.W.2d at 846 ("there is no evidence in the record reflecting sentences imposed for similar offenses on criminals in Texas or other jurisdictions by which to make a comparison"). | 2 | 2 |
Williamson v. Stategreen2 sentences2008A motion for new trial is an appropriate way to preserve this type of claim for review.2 See Williamson v. State, 175 S.W.3d 522 , 523–24 (Tex. App.—Texarkana 2005, no pet.); Delacruz v. State, 167 S.W.3d 904 (Tex. App.—Texarkana 2005, no pet.). 2008A motion for new trial is an appropriate way to preserve this type of claim for review. (2) See Williamson v. State , 175 S.W.3d 522, 523-24 (Tex. App.--Texarkana 2005, no pet.); Delacruz v. State , 167 S.W.3d 904 (Tex. App.--Texarkana 2005, no pet.). | 1 | 2 |
Swearingen v. Stategreen1 sentence2014See Swearingen, 101 S.W.3d at 99 . | 1 | 1 |
Curtis v. Gibbsgreen1 sentence1993The Supreme Court of Texas has held that mandamus will lie to determine the question of dominant jurisdiction if a second court interferes with an action first filed in another court of coordinate jurisdiction. 2 See Curtis v. Gibbs, 511 S.W.2d 263, 267 (Tex.1974). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Texas. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Delacruz v. State
green
2 sentences2008A motion for new trial is an appropriate way to preserve this type of claim for review.2 See Williamson v. State, 175 S.W.3d 522 , 523–24 (Tex. App.—Texarkana 2005, no pet.); Delacruz v. State, 167 S.W.3d 904 (Tex. App.—Texarkana 2005, no pet.). 2008A motion for new trial is an appropriate way to preserve this type of claim for review. (2) See Williamson v. State , 175 S.W.3d 522, 523-24 (Tex. App.--Texarkana 2005, no pet.); Delacruz v. State , 167 S.W.3d 904 (Tex. App.--Texarkana 2005, no pet.). | 2 | 2008–2008 |
Rehberg v. Paulk
green
2 sentences2014In their brief, as well as in their response to Shannon’s motion for summary judgment, they “qualifiedly concede” that Rehberg v. Paulk, — U.S. —, 132 S.Ct. 1497 , 182 L.Ed.2d 593 (2012), “appears to demand summary judgment in favor of the Coyels” on these claims. 2014In their brief, as well as in their response to Shannon’s motion for summary judgment, they “qualifiedly concede” that Rehberg v. Paulk, — U.S. —, 132 S.Ct. 1497 , 182 L.Ed.2d 593 (2012), “appears to demand summary judgment in favor of the Coyels” on these claims. | 1 | 2014–2014 |
The City of El Paso v. Lilli M. Heinrich
green
1 sentence2014Under this exception, immunity “does not preclude prospective injunctive remedies in official-capacity suits against government actors who violate statutory or constitutional provisions.” City of El Paso v. Heinrich, 284 S.W.3d 366 , 368–69 (Tex. 2009). | 1 | 2014–2014 |
Huff v. Huff
green
1 sentence1985Though Shannon’s brief does not make it abundantly clear, it seems that in the third point he argues that the cases of Huff v. Huff, 648 S.W.2d 286 (Tex.1983) and Squires v. Squires, 673 S.W.2d 681 (Tex.App. — Corpus Christi 1984, no writ) hold that all actions to reduce child support to judgment under TEX.FAM.CODE ANN. sec. 14.09(c) must be brought within ten years from the date of the divorce decree that awards support. | 1 | 1985–1985 |
Marriage of Squires v. Squires
green
1 sentence1985Though Shannon’s brief does not make it abundantly clear, it seems that in the third point he argues that the cases of Huff v. Huff, 648 S.W.2d 286 (Tex.1983) and Squires v. Squires, 673 S.W.2d 681 (Tex.App. — Corpus Christi 1984, no writ) hold that all actions to reduce child support to judgment under TEX.FAM.CODE ANN. sec. 14.09(c) must be brought within ten years from the date of the divorce decree that awards support. | 1 | 1985–1985 |
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.