statutory elements standard in Texas

7 Texas opinions name it 2 courts 2001–2020 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)

Case	Followed	Cited
Foster v. Richardsongreen texapp · 2009 · cited in 2 Texas opinions naming this issue, 2010–2010 2 sentences 2010See id. 2010See id.	2	2
Jelinek v. Casasgreen tex · 2010 · cited in 2 Texas opinions naming this issue, 2016–2016 2 sentences 2016We turn then to review the information “found within the four corners of the expert report.” See Jelinek, 328 S.W.3d at 539 . 2016To satisfy the statutory elements of standard of care and breach, Rodriguez relies on the pharmacist’s opinion that appellees’ conduct fell below the standard of care by “continuing to dispense” the prescription for Pradaxa “after the prescribing physician indicated it should be discontinued” and by failing to verify if the prescription “should be continued with the prescribing physician.” See Jelinek, 328 S.W.3d at 539 (requiring expert report on standard of care, breach, and causation).	1	2
Terry Holcomb, Sr. v. Waller County, Texasgreen texapp · 2018 · cited in 1 Texas opinions naming this issue, 2020–2020 1 sentence 2020See Holcomb v. Waller County, 546 S.W.3d 833, 840 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2018, pet. denied) (reversing denial of TCPA motion to dismiss after holding that nonmovant could not make out prima facie case in absence of standing to pursue claim).	1	1

Distinguished, questioned or overruled (0)

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

Also cited on this issue (2)

Case	Cited	Years
Tovar v. METHODIST HEALTHCARE SYSTEM green texapp · 2005 1 sentence 2015No claim to original U.S. Government Works. 5 Tovar v. Methodist Healthcare System of San Antonio, Ltd., L.L.P., 185 S.W.3d 65 (2005) and represents a good-faith effort to provide a fair summary CONCLUSION of the statutory elements of standard of care, breach, and [11] [12] “[A] plaintiff need not present evidence in the causation.	1	2015–2015
Williams v. Chatman green texapp · 1999 2 sentences 2001Id. at 699-701 . 2001Id. at 699-701 .	1	2001–2001

Where else courts name it

CA 156 (1984–2026) IN 99 (1999–2024) WY 33 (1992–2022) CO 15 (1998–2022) MO 13 (1981–2014) TN 12 (1999–2006) KS 11 (1989–2008) NE 9 (1997–2022) OK 8 (1999–2024) OH 8 (1987–2019) TX 7 (2001–2020) FL 7 (2011–2026) IA 4 (1990–2020) IL 4 (2003–2010) OR 4 (2015–2024) PA 4 (2006–2020) MI 3 (2007–2018) WA 3 (2019–2022) NY 3 (2014–2014) NJ 2 (1989–1991) HI 2 (1998–2005) WI 2 (1981–1986) ID 2 (1991–2014)

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