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 1990–2019 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.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
Providence Institution for Savings v. Simsgreen2 sentences2019Second, although there is a general rule “that a person who is subrogated to the rights or securities of another many not enforce the same until the claim of the latter against the debtor has been paid in full,” Providence Inst. for Sav. v. Sims, 441 S.W.2d 516, 519 (Tex. 1969), the purpose of that rule is to protect the prior creditor (here, Sterling). 2015At the request of the parties, the See, e.g., Providence Inst. for Sav. v. Sims, 441 S.W.2d 516, 519 (Tex. 1969) (“[A] person who is subrogated to the rights or securities of another may not enforce the same until the claim of the latter is paid in full . . . .”). 3As of September 19, 2013, FNB alleged that the amount owed on the 2008 loan was approximately $281,830.34. | 2 | 2 |
Lilly v. Stategreen2 sentences2015As this Court noted in Lilly v. State, 365 S.W.3d 321, 329 (Tex. Crim. 2015As this Court noted in Lilly v. State, 365 S.W.3d 321, 329 (Tex. Crim. | 2 | 2 |
United States v. Richard Eugene Millergreen2 sentences2010Goudeau, 209 S.W.3d at 716 ; see United States v. Miller, 146 F.3d 274, 279 (5th Cir. 1998); United States v. McDonald, 453 F.3d 958 (7th Cir. 2006) (applying Illinois state law––a traffic stop based on an act that was not a traffic violation); Lopez-Valdez, 178 F.3d at 289 ; Garza v. State, 261 S.W.3d 361, 368 (Tex. App.—Austin 2008, pet. ref‘d), cert. denied, 130 S.Ct. 123 (2009).4 In this instance, however, as we have previously pointed out, this argument was not presented to the trial court until a hearing on Butler‘s motion for new trial. 2003Goudeau , 209 S.W.3d at 716 ; see United States v. Miller , 146 F.3d 274, 279 (5th Cir. 1998); United States v. McDonald , 453 F.3d 958 (7th Cir. 2006) (applying Illinois state law––a traffic stop based on an act that was not a traffic violation); Lopez-Valdez , 178 F.3d at 289 ; Garza v. State , 261 S.W.3d 361, 368 (Tex. App.—Austin 2008, pet. ref’d), cert. denied , 130 S.Ct. 123 (2009). [4] In this instance, however, as we have previously pointed out, this argument was not presented to the trial court until a hearing on Butler’s motion for new trial. | 2 | 2 |
Garza v. Stategreen2 sentences2010Goudeau, 209 S.W.3d at 716 ; see United States v. Miller, 146 F.3d 274, 279 (5th Cir. 1998); United States v. McDonald, 453 F.3d 958 (7th Cir. 2006) (applying Illinois state law––a traffic stop based on an act that was not a traffic violation); Lopez-Valdez, 178 F.3d at 289 ; Garza v. State, 261 S.W.3d 361, 368 (Tex. App.—Austin 2008, pet. ref‘d), cert. denied, 130 S.Ct. 123 (2009).4 In this instance, however, as we have previously pointed out, this argument was not presented to the trial court until a hearing on Butler‘s motion for new trial. 2003Goudeau , 209 S.W.3d at 716 ; see United States v. Miller , 146 F.3d 274, 279 (5th Cir. 1998); United States v. McDonald , 453 F.3d 958 (7th Cir. 2006) (applying Illinois state law––a traffic stop based on an act that was not a traffic violation); Lopez-Valdez , 178 F.3d at 289 ; Garza v. State , 261 S.W.3d 361, 368 (Tex. App.—Austin 2008, pet. ref’d), cert. denied , 130 S.Ct. 123 (2009). [4] In this instance, however, as we have previously pointed out, this argument was not presented to the trial court until a hearing on Butler’s motion for new trial. | 2 | 2 |
Fievel v. Zubergreen2 sentences1990For example, in Fievel v. Zuber, 67 Tex. 275 , 3 S.W. 273, 275 (1887), the court stated that, although sub-rogation may generally be accomplished through an agreement between the debtor and a third party, without the consent of the creditor, “it cannot be done as to a part of the debt, or in any manner to affect the rights of the creditor to his prejudice.” The rule denying immediate enforcement of subrogation rights to one who only partially discharges a lien is grounded in the same equitable considerations: [A] person who is subrogated to the rights or securities of another may not enforce t 1990For example, in Fievel v. Zuber, 67 Tex. 275 , 3 S.W. 273, 275 (1887), the court stated that, although sub-rogation may generally be accomplished through an agreement between the debtor and a third party, without the consent of the creditor, “it cannot be done as to a part of the debt, or in any manner to affect the rights of the creditor to his prejudice.” The rule denying immediate enforcement of subrogation rights to one who only partially discharges a lien is grounded in the same equitable considerations: [A] person who is subrogated to the rights or securities of another may not enforce t | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Texas. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Goudeau v. State
green
2 sentences2010Goudeau, 209 S.W.3d at 716 ; see United States v. Miller, 146 F.3d 274, 279 (5th Cir. 1998); United States v. McDonald, 453 F.3d 958 (7th Cir. 2006) (applying Illinois state law––a traffic stop based on an act that was not a traffic violation); Lopez-Valdez, 178 F.3d at 289 ; Garza v. State, 261 S.W.3d 361, 368 (Tex. App.—Austin 2008, pet. ref‘d), cert. denied, 130 S.Ct. 123 (2009).4 In this instance, however, as we have previously pointed out, this argument was not presented to the trial court until a hearing on Butler‘s motion for new trial. 2003Goudeau , 209 S.W.3d at 716 ; see United States v. Miller , 146 F.3d 274, 279 (5th Cir. 1998); United States v. McDonald , 453 F.3d 958 (7th Cir. 2006) (applying Illinois state law––a traffic stop based on an act that was not a traffic violation); Lopez-Valdez , 178 F.3d at 289 ; Garza v. State , 261 S.W.3d 361, 368 (Tex. App.—Austin 2008, pet. ref’d), cert. denied , 130 S.Ct. 123 (2009). [4] In this instance, however, as we have previously pointed out, this argument was not presented to the trial court until a hearing on Butler’s motion for new trial. | 2 | 2003–2010 |
United States v. Sonia Luz Lopez-Valdez
green
2 sentences2010Goudeau, 209 S.W.3d at 716 ; see United States v. Miller, 146 F.3d 274, 279 (5th Cir. 1998); United States v. McDonald, 453 F.3d 958 (7th Cir. 2006) (applying Illinois state law––a traffic stop based on an act that was not a traffic violation); Lopez-Valdez, 178 F.3d at 289 ; Garza v. State, 261 S.W.3d 361, 368 (Tex. App.—Austin 2008, pet. ref‘d), cert. denied, 130 S.Ct. 123 (2009).4 In this instance, however, as we have previously pointed out, this argument was not presented to the trial court until a hearing on Butler‘s motion for new trial. 2003Goudeau , 209 S.W.3d at 716 ; see United States v. Miller , 146 F.3d 274, 279 (5th Cir. 1998); United States v. McDonald , 453 F.3d 958 (7th Cir. 2006) (applying Illinois state law––a traffic stop based on an act that was not a traffic violation); Lopez-Valdez , 178 F.3d at 289 ; Garza v. State , 261 S.W.3d 361, 368 (Tex. App.—Austin 2008, pet. ref’d), cert. denied , 130 S.Ct. 123 (2009). [4] In this instance, however, as we have previously pointed out, this argument was not presented to the trial court until a hearing on Butler’s motion for new trial. | 2 | 2003–2010 |
United States v. Demarco L. McDonald
green
2 sentences2010Goudeau, 209 S.W.3d at 716 ; see United States v. Miller, 146 F.3d 274, 279 (5th Cir. 1998); United States v. McDonald, 453 F.3d 958 (7th Cir. 2006) (applying Illinois state law––a traffic stop based on an act that was not a traffic violation); Lopez-Valdez, 178 F.3d at 289 ; Garza v. State, 261 S.W.3d 361, 368 (Tex. App.—Austin 2008, pet. ref‘d), cert. denied, 130 S.Ct. 123 (2009).4 In this instance, however, as we have previously pointed out, this argument was not presented to the trial court until a hearing on Butler‘s motion for new trial. 2003Goudeau , 209 S.W.3d at 716 ; see United States v. Miller , 146 F.3d 274, 279 (5th Cir. 1998); United States v. McDonald , 453 F.3d 958 (7th Cir. 2006) (applying Illinois state law––a traffic stop based on an act that was not a traffic violation); Lopez-Valdez , 178 F.3d at 289 ; Garza v. State , 261 S.W.3d 361, 368 (Tex. App.—Austin 2008, pet. ref’d), cert. denied , 130 S.Ct. 123 (2009). [4] In this instance, however, as we have previously pointed out, this argument was not presented to the trial court until a hearing on Butler’s motion for new trial. | 2 | 2003–2010 |
State v. Ballentine
green
2 sentences2010Goudeau, 209 S.W.3d at 716 ; see United States v. Miller, 146 F.3d 274, 279 (5th Cir. 1998); United States v. McDonald, 453 F.3d 958 (7th Cir. 2006) (applying Illinois state law––a traffic stop based on an act that was not a traffic violation); Lopez-Valdez, 178 F.3d at 289 ; Garza v. State, 261 S.W.3d 361, 368 (Tex. App.—Austin 2008, pet. ref‘d), cert. denied, 130 S.Ct. 123 (2009).4 In this instance, however, as we have previously pointed out, this argument was not presented to the trial court until a hearing on Butler‘s motion for new trial. 2003Goudeau , 209 S.W.3d at 716 ; see United States v. Miller , 146 F.3d 274, 279 (5th Cir. 1998); United States v. McDonald , 453 F.3d 958 (7th Cir. 2006) (applying Illinois state law––a traffic stop based on an act that was not a traffic violation); Lopez-Valdez , 178 F.3d at 289 ; Garza v. State , 261 S.W.3d 361, 368 (Tex. App.—Austin 2008, pet. ref’d), cert. denied , 130 S.Ct. 123 (2009). [4] In this instance, however, as we have previously pointed out, this argument was not presented to the trial court until a hearing on Butler’s motion for new trial. | 2 | 2003–2010 |
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.