judgment based upon error in Texas

1992In Gee v. Liberty Mutual Fire Insurance Co., 765 S.W.2d 394 (Tex.1989), the Texas Supreme Court set forth the standard for obtaining a reversal of a judgment based upon error of the trial court in admission or exclusion of evidence: there must be a showing (1) that the trial court did in fact commit error, and (2) that the error was reasonably calculated to cause and probably did cause rendition of an improper judgment, citing Bridges v. City of Richardson, 163 Tex. 292 , 354 S.W.2d 366, 368 (1962), and Tex.R.App.P. 81(b).

1992In Gee v. Liberty Mutual Fire Insurance Co., 765 S.W.2d 394 (Tex.1989), the Texas Supreme Court set forth the standard for obtaining a reversal of a judgment based upon error of the trial court in admission or exclusion of evidence: there must be a showing (1) that the trial court did in fact commit error, and (2) that the error was reasonably calculated to cause and probably did cause rendition of an improper judgment, citing Bridges v. City of Richardson, 163 Tex. 292 , 354 S.W.2d 366, 368 (1962), and Tex.R.App.P. 81(b).

2021Co., 765 S.W.2d 394, 396 (Tex. 1989) 12 (“To obtain reversal of a judgment based upon error of the trial court in admission or exclusion of evidence, the following must be shown: (1) that the trial court did in fact commit error; and (2) that the error was reasonably calculated to cause and probably did cause rendition of an improper judgment.”)).

1993Co., 765 S.W.2d 394, 396 (Tex.1989): To obtain reversal of a judgment based upon error of the trial court in admission *160 oi’ exclusioii of evidence, the following must be shown: (1) that the trial coui’t did in fact commit ei’ror; and (2) that the error was reasonably calculated to cause and probably did cause rendition of an impi’oper judgment.

2015“To reverse a judgment based upon error in the admission or exclusion of evidence, the appellant must show that the trial court Grubbs v. State Page 7 committed error and that the error was reasonably calculated to cause and probably did cause rendition of an improper judgment.” R.A.L., 291 S.W.3d at 446 ; McCraw v. Maris, 828 S.W.2d 756, 757 (Tex.1992)).

2015“To reverse a judgment based upon error in the admission or exclusion of evidence, the appellant must show that the trial court committed error and that the error was reasonably calculated to cause and probably did cause rendition of an improper judgment.” R.A.L., 291 S.W.3d at 446 ; McCraw v. Maris, 828 S.W.2d 756, 757 (Tex.1992)).

2013App. P. 44.1(a); Romero v. KPH Consolidation, Inc., 166 S.W.3d 212, 225 (Tex. 2005) (stating that to obtain reversal of a judgment based upon an error in the trial court, the appellant must show that the error occurred and that it 43 Regarding the property with transmission lines, Crosstex argues that Wickliffe conceded that the inclusion of this property in her analysis meant that she did not do a true paired sales analysis; in other words, she ―didn‘t take those two sales and then compare them to a property within that same general location to determine the impact of the pipeline and the ele

2013App. P. 44.1(a); Romero v. KPH Consolidation, Inc., 166 S.W.3d 212, 225 (Tex. 2005) (stating that to obtain reversal of a judgment based upon an error in the trial court, the appellant must show that the error occurred and that it probably caused rendition of an improper judgment or probably prevented the appellant from properly presenting the case to this court); see also Tex. Fam.

2004Grossnickle v. Grossnickle , 935 S.W.2d 830, 841 (Tex. App.—Texarkana 1996, writ denied). (footnote: 5) To obtain reversal of a judgment based upon an error in the trial court, the appellant must show that (1) the error occurred; and (2) it probably caused rendition of an improper judgment, or probably prevented the appellant from properly presenting the case to the appellate court.

2004Grossnickle v. Grossnickle, 935 S.W.2d 830, 841 (Tex.App.-Texarkana 1996, writ denied). 5 To obtain reversal of a judgment based upon an error in the trial court, the appellant must show that (1) the error occurred; and (2) it probably caused rendition of an improper judgment, or probably prevented the appellant from properly presenting the case to the appellate court.

2015“To reverse a judgment based upon error in the admission or exclusion of evidence, the appellant must show that the trial court Grubbs v. State Page 7 committed error and that the error was reasonably calculated to cause and probably did cause rendition of an improper judgment.” R.A.L., 291 S.W.3d at 446 ; McCraw v. Maris, 828 S.W.2d 756, 757 (Tex.1992)).

2015“To reverse a judgment based upon error in the admission or exclusion of evidence, the appellant must show that the trial court committed error and that the error was reasonably calculated to cause and probably did cause rendition of an improper judgment.” R.A.L., 291 S.W.3d at 446 ; McCraw v. Maris, 828 S.W.2d 756, 757 (Tex.1992)).

2012Co. v. Middleman , 661 S.W.2d 182, 185 (Tex. App.—San Antonio 1983, writ ref’d n.r.e.).

1985Atlantic Mutual Insurance Company v. Middleman, 661 S.W.2d 182, 185 (Tex.App.—San Antonio 1983, writ ref’d n.r.e.).

2014Tex.R.App.P. 44.1(a); In re D.I.B., 988 S.W.2d 753 , 756 n. 10 (Tex.1999); Tex. Dep’t of Human Servs. v. White, 817 S.W.2d 62, 63 (Tex.1991).

2002Tex.R.App.P. 44.1(a); In re D.I.B., 988 S.W.2d 753 , 756 n. 10 (Tex. 1999); Tex. Dep’t of Human Servs. v. White, 817 S.W.2d 62, 63 (Tex.1991).

2010App. P. 44.1(a); see Reliance Steel & Aluminum Co. v. Sevcik, 267 S.W.3d 867, 871 (Tex. 2008); Romero v. KPH Consolidation, Inc., 166 S.W.3d 212, 225 (Tex. 2005). 85 Interstate Northborough P’ship v. State, 66 S.W.3d 213, 220 (Tex. 2001); City of Brownsville v. Alvarado, 897 S.W.2d 750 , 753–54 (Tex. 1995). 86 State v. Cent.

2009App. P. 44.1(a); Romero v. KPH Consolidation, Inc., 166 S.W.3d 212, 225 (Tex. 2005). 4 Interstate Northborough P’ship v. State, 66 S.W.3d 213, 220 (Tex. 2001). 5 We note that neither the jury nor the trial court made a finding under subsection (D). 6 See Tex. Fam.

1986Aultman v. Dallas Railway and Terminal Co., 152 Tex. *763 509, 260 S.W.2d 596, 599 (1953).

1981Aultman v. Dallas Railway & Terminal Co., 152 Tex. 509 , 260 S.W.2d 596 (1953); Southwestern Greyhound Lines, Inc. v. Dickson, 149 Tex. 599 , 236 S.W.2d 115 (1951); Otto v. Otto, 438 S.W.2d 587 (Tex.Civ.App.-San Antonio 1969); Wilson v. City of Port Lavaca, 407 S.W.2d 325 (Tex.Civ.App.—Corpus Christi 1966, writ ref’d n.r.e.); Tex.R.Civ.P. 434.

2014See id.

2013App. P. 44.1(a); Romero v. KPH Consolidation, Inc. , 166 S.W.3d 212, 225 (Tex. 2005) (stating that to obtain reversal of a judgment based upon an error in the trial court, the appellant must show that the error occurred and that it probably caused rendition of an improper judgment or probably prevented the appellant from properly presenting the case to this court). [72] See Hunt , 228 S.W.2d at 156 (holding that an assumption that a pipeline may affect a property’s market value “is hardly less reasonable” than a supposition “that an electric power line across a tract may reduce its market valu

2013App. P. 44.1(a); Romero v. KPH Consolidation, Inc. , 166 S.W.3d 212, 225 (Tex. 2005) (stating that to obtain reversal of a judgment based upon an error in the trial court, the appellant must show that the error occurred and that it probably caused rendition of an improper judgment or probably prevented the appellant from properly presenting the case to this court). [72] See Hunt , 228 S.W.2d at 156 (holding that an assumption that a pipeline may affect a property’s market value “is hardly less reasonable” than a supposition “that an electric power line across a tract may reduce its market valu

2013App.—Texarkana 1976, no writ). [77] 843 S.W.2d 448, 457 (Tex. 1992) (holding that the three jury questions required under Carpenter for partial takings cases “should be reduced to two questions: first, the market value of the part taken, considered as severed land, and second, damages to the remainder, accompanied by an instruction that such damages should be determined by considering the difference between the remainder’s pre-and post-taking value”). [78] Id. [79] Tex. R.

2013App.—Texarkana 1976, no writ). [77] 843 S.W.2d 448, 457 (Tex. 1992) (holding that the three jury questions required under Carpenter for partial takings cases “should be reduced to two questions: first, the market value of the part taken, considered as severed land, and second, damages to the remainder, accompanied by an instruction that such damages should be determined by considering the difference between the remainder’s pre-and post-taking value”). [78] Id. [79] Tex. R.

2013App. P. 44.1(a); Romero v. KPH Consolidation, Inc. , 166 S.W.3d 212, 225 (Tex. 2005) (stating that to obtain reversal of a judgment based upon an error in the trial court, the appellant must show that the error occurred and that it probably caused rendition of an improper judgment or probably prevented the appellant from properly presenting the case to this court). [72] See Hunt , 228 S.W.2d at 156 (holding that an assumption that a pipeline may affect a property’s market value “is hardly less reasonable” than a supposition “that an electric power line across a tract may reduce its market valu

2013App. P. 44.1(a); Romero v. KPH Consolidation, Inc. , 166 S.W.3d 212, 225 (Tex. 2005) (stating that to obtain reversal of a judgment based upon an error in the trial court, the appellant must show that the error occurred and that it probably caused rendition of an improper judgment or probably prevented the appellant from properly presenting the case to this court). [72] See Hunt , 228 S.W.2d at 156 (holding that an assumption that a pipeline may affect a property’s market value “is hardly less reasonable” than a supposition “that an electric power line across a tract may reduce its market valu

2011Co. of State of Penn., 89 S.W.3d 239, 241 (Tex. App.—Texarkana 2002, no pet.). ―To reverse a judgment based upon error in the admission or exclusion of evidence, the appellant must show that the trial court committed error and that the error was reasonably 2 calculated to cause and probably did cause rendition of an improper judgment.‖ R.A.L., 291 S.W.3d at 446 (citing TEX.

2010App. P. 44.1(a); see Reliance Steel & Aluminum Co. v. Sevcik, 267 S.W.3d 867, 871 (Tex. 2008); Romero v. KPH Consolidation, Inc., 166 S.W.3d 212, 225 (Tex. 2005). 85 Interstate Northborough P’ship v. State, 66 S.W.3d 213, 220 (Tex. 2001); City of Brownsville v. Alvarado, 897 S.W.2d 750 , 753–54 (Tex. 1995). 86 State v. Cent.

2010Co. v. Allen, 15 S.W.3d 525 , 527–28 (Tex. 2000) (op. on reh’g). 81 Owens-Corning Fiberglas Corp. v. Malone, 972 S.W.2d 35, 43 (Tex. 1998). 82 Low v. Henry, 221 S.W.3d 609, 614 (Tex. 2007); Cire v. Cummings, 134 S.W.3d 835 , 838–39 (Tex. 2004). 83 E.I. du Pont de Nemours & Co. v. Robinson, 923 S.W.2d 549, 558 (Tex. 1995); see also Low, 221 S.W.3d at 620 . 35 To obtain reversal of a judgment based upon an error in the trial court, the appellant must show that the error occurred and that it probably caused rendition of an improper judgment or probably prevented the appellant from properly

2010Co. v. Allen, 15 S.W.3d 525 , 527–28 (Tex. 2000) (op. on reh’g). 81 Owens-Corning Fiberglas Corp. v. Malone, 972 S.W.2d 35, 43 (Tex. 1998). 82 Low v. Henry, 221 S.W.3d 609, 614 (Tex. 2007); Cire v. Cummings, 134 S.W.3d 835 , 838–39 (Tex. 2004). 83 E.I. du Pont de Nemours & Co. v. Robinson, 923 S.W.2d 549, 558 (Tex. 1995); see also Low, 221 S.W.3d at 620 . 35 To obtain reversal of a judgment based upon an error in the trial court, the appellant must show that the error occurred and that it probably caused rendition of an improper judgment or probably prevented the appellant from properly

2010Co. v. Allen, 15 S.W.3d 525 , 527–28 (Tex. 2000) (op. on reh’g). 81 Owens-Corning Fiberglas Corp. v. Malone, 972 S.W.2d 35, 43 (Tex. 1998). 82 Low v. Henry, 221 S.W.3d 609, 614 (Tex. 2007); Cire v. Cummings, 134 S.W.3d 835 , 838–39 (Tex. 2004). 83 E.I. du Pont de Nemours & Co. v. Robinson, 923 S.W.2d 549, 558 (Tex. 1995); see also Low, 221 S.W.3d at 620 . 35 To obtain reversal of a judgment based upon an error in the trial court, the appellant must show that the error occurred and that it probably caused rendition of an improper judgment or probably prevented the appellant from properly

2010Co. v. Allen, 15 S.W.3d 525 , 527–28 (Tex. 2000) (op. on reh’g). 81 Owens-Corning Fiberglas Corp. v. Malone, 972 S.W.2d 35, 43 (Tex. 1998). 82 Low v. Henry, 221 S.W.3d 609, 614 (Tex. 2007); Cire v. Cummings, 134 S.W.3d 835 , 838–39 (Tex. 2004). 83 E.I. du Pont de Nemours & Co. v. Robinson, 923 S.W.2d 549, 558 (Tex. 1995); see also Low, 221 S.W.3d at 620 . 35 To obtain reversal of a judgment based upon an error in the trial court, the appellant must show that the error occurred and that it probably caused rendition of an improper judgment or probably prevented the appellant from properly

2002“To obtain reversal of a judgment based upon error in the admission or exclusion of evidence, the appellant must show (1) the trial court did in fact commit error and (2) the error was reasonably calculated to cause and probably did cause the rendition of an improper judgment.” Hunt v. Baldwin , 68 S.W.3d 117, 126 ( Tex. App.— Houston [14th Dist.] 2001, no pet.) ( citing Tex. R.

2000Boothe v. Hausler, 766 S.W.2d 788, 789 (Tex.1989).

2000Boothe v. Hausler, 766 S.W.2d 788, 789 (Tex.1989).

1999See Gee, 765 S.W.2d at 396 ; Bridges v. City of Richardson, 163 Tex. 292 , 354 S.W.2d 366, 368 (1962) (per curiam); Parkway Hosp., Inc. v. Lee, 946 S.W.2d 580, 583 (Tex.App. — Houston [14th Dist.] 1997, writ denied); see also Tex.R.App.P. 81(b) (current version at Tex.R.App.P. 44.1).