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.
6 Texas opinions name it 2 courts 1988–2018 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 |
|---|---|---|
State of Texas v. Eppersongreen2 sentences2007Epperson, 42 S.W.2d at 230 (if tax collector is “wrongfully withholding funds” owed as commission for services provided by private party in collecting delinquent taxes, “action to compel him to pay the same to a party entitled thereto is not one against the state which can only be brought with the consent of the state.”); see also Dodgen, 308 S.W.2d at 841-41 (distinguishing 15 This Court explained the distinction in O’Bryant, in the context of a constitutional claim: [T]o determine whether the officers’ request for back pay under the constitution is an equitable claim, we look to the general 2007Epperson, 42 S.W.2d at 230 (if tax collector is “wrongfully withholding funds” 15 This Court explained the distinction in O’Bryant, in the context of a constitutional claim: [T]o determine whether the officers’ request for back pay under the constitution is an equitable claim, we look to the general distinction between actions at law and actions in equity. | 2 | 2 |
Texas Department of Parks & Wildlife v. Mirandagreen1 sentence2018Aside from Dean Holley’s declaration stating that the remedy “fit the facts,” nothing in the record explains why the university imposed the remedy that it did.30 Accordingly, we conclude that the appellees did not conclusively demonstrate that the decision to implement the “class-wide remedy” was an exercise of professional judgment entitled to judicial deference in the context of a constitutional challenge.31 We therefore sustain Villarreal’s issue challenging the dismissal of his substantive due-course-of-law claim. 29 See Ewing, 474 U.S. at 225 , 106 S. Ct. at 513 ; see also Miranda, 133 S. | 1 | 1 |
Alanis v. University of Texas Health Science Centergreen1 sentence2018Aside from Dean Holley’s declaration stating that the remedy “fit the facts,” nothing in the record explains why the university imposed the remedy that it did.30 Accordingly, we conclude that the appellees did not conclusively demonstrate that the decision to implement the “class-wide remedy” was an exercise of professional judgment entitled to judicial deference in the context of a constitutional challenge.31 We therefore sustain Villarreal’s issue challenging the dismissal of his substantive due-course-of-law claim. 29 See Ewing, 474 U.S. at 225 , 106 S. Ct. at 513 ; see also Miranda, 133 S. | 1 | 1 |
Jones v. Stategreen1 sentence2015When conducting a harm analysis in the context of a constitutional violation, appellate courts are to “‘judge the magnitude of the error in light of the evidence as a whole to determine the degree of prejudice to the defendant resulting from that error.’” Jones v. State, 119 S.W.3d 766, 777 (Tex. Crim. | 1 | 1 |
City of Houston v. Duckettgreen1 sentence2007Gov't Code Ann. § 143.009 (a) (authorizing commission or a designated commission member to "investigate and report on all matters relating to the enforcement and effect of this chapter . . . and shall determine if the chapter and rules are being obeyed"). [14] See City of Houston v. Duckett, 486 S.W.2d 871, 872 (Tex.Civ.App.-Houston [14th Dist.] 1972, writ granted) (noting that trial court judgment later affirmed by supreme court included "pay[ing] back unpaid money above his then salary accruing from [90 days after date of vacancy] plus interest thereon"). [15] This Court explained the distin | 1 | 1 |
WD Haden Company v. Dodgengreen1 sentence2007Epperson, 42 S.W.2d at 230 (if tax collector is “wrongfully withholding funds” owed as commission for services provided by private party in collecting delinquent taxes, “action to compel him to pay the same to a party entitled thereto is not one against the state which can only be brought with the consent of the state.”); see also Dodgen, 308 S.W.2d at 841-41 (distinguishing 15 This Court explained the distinction in O’Bryant, in the context of a constitutional claim: [T]o determine whether the officers’ request for back pay under the constitution is an equitable claim, we look to the general | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Texas. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Regents of the University of Michigan v. Ewing
green
2 sentences2018Aside from Dean Holley’s declaration stating that the remedy “fit the facts,” nothing in the record explains why the university imposed the remedy that it did.30 Accordingly, we conclude that the appellees did not conclusively demonstrate that the decision to implement the “class-wide remedy” was an exercise of professional judgment entitled to judicial deference in the context of a constitutional challenge.31 We therefore sustain Villarreal’s issue challenging the dismissal of his substantive due-course-of-law claim. 29 See Ewing, 474 U.S. at 225 , 106 S. Ct. at 513 ; see also Miranda, 133 S. 2018Aside from Dean Holley’s declaration stating that the remedy “fit the facts,” nothing in the record explains why the university imposed the remedy that it did.30 Accordingly, we conclude that the appellees did not conclusively demonstrate that the decision to implement the “class-wide remedy” was an exercise of professional judgment entitled to judicial deference in the context of a constitutional challenge.31 We therefore sustain Villarreal’s issue challenging the dismissal of his substantive due-course-of-law claim. 29 See Ewing, 474 U.S. at 225 , 106 S. Ct. at 513 ; see also Miranda, 133 S. | 1 | 2018–2018 |
96 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 6094, 96 Daily Journal D.A.R. 9962 United States of America v. Miguel Polanco
green
1 sentence2015App. 2003) (quoting United States v. Polanco, 93 F.3d 555 , 562–63 (9th Cir. 1996)). | 1 | 2015–2015 |
Sax v. Votteler
green
2 sentences1988As stated previously, the test to be applied in the context of a constitutional challenge under Texas’ open courts provision is whether the diminution of redress is “unreasonable or arbitrary when balanced against the purpose and basis of the statute.” Sax, 648 S.W.2d at 666 . 1988As stated previously, the test to be applied in the context of a constitutional challenge under Texas' open courts provision is whether the diminution of redress is "unreasonable or arbitrary when balanced against the purpose and basis of the statute." Sax, 648 S.W.2d at 666 . | 1 | 1988–1988 |
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.