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 3 courts 1965–2018 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 |
|---|---|---|
Burnaman v. Heatongreen1 sentence2013See Bumaman v. Heaton, 240 S.W.2d 288, 339 (Tex. 1951) (for court to have notice of withdrawal of consent, pleading must be such to reasonably prompt the court to make an inquiry into whether party withdrew consent). | 1 | 1 |
Traut v. Beatygreen2 sentences2009In Traut v. Beaty , the court noted that A res ipsa loquitur cannot be applied in every case in which an object is left in a patient = s body @ because to do so would A make the exception the rule. @ 75 S.W.3d 661, 667 (Tex. App. C Texarkana 2002, no pet.). 2009The court reasoned that this conclusion A follows logically from the rule that res ipsa loquitur is inapplicable in medical malpractice cases, except when the nature of the alleged malpractice and injuries are plainly within the common knowledge of lay people. @ Id. at 666 . | 1 | 1 |
Texas & New Orleans Railroad v. Railroad Commissiongreen2 sentences1965Co. v. Railroad Commission, 145 Tex. 541 , 200 S.W.2d 626, 629 (1947), this Court in construing the legislative act involved in that case, said that “ * * * whenever the legislative purpose is ascertained, the significance of words used may be restricted or enlarged in order to effectuate that purpose and to give the act the meaning which the lawmakers manifestly intended. * * * ” Where the intent is apparent from the words of the statute as is undoubtedly the case with regard to the words of paragraph (H), supra, it is not necessary for this Court to make an analysis of the extrinsic evidence 1965Co. v. Railroad Commission, 145 Tex. 541 , 200 S.W.2d 626, 629 (1947), this Court in construing the legislative act involved in that case, said that “ * * * whenever the legislative purpose is ascertained, the significance of words used may be restricted or enlarged in order to effectuate that purpose and to give the act the meaning which the lawmakers manifestly intended. * * * ” Where the intent is apparent from the words of the statute as is undoubtedly the case with regard to the words of paragraph (H), supra, it is not necessary for this Court to make an analysis of the extrinsic evidence | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Texas. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Kuyava v. State of Texas
green
1 sentence2018While the court in Kuyava may have said that the “better practice” would be for the trial court to make inquiry irrespective of whether competency was at issue, Kuyava v. State, 538 S.W.2d at 628 , it failed to actually impose such an obligation in all instances. | 1 | 2018–2018 |
Hale v. Henkel
green
1 sentence2015The make the privilege applicable when irrelevance of Murphy to such a situa- there was a mere possibility of a crim- tion was made clear in Albertson v. Sub- inal charge being made. versive Activities Control Board, 382 U. The Court said in Hale v. Henkel, 201 S. 70, 86 S.Ct. 194 , 15 L.Ed.2d 165 , in U.S. 43, 67, 26 S.Ct. 370, 376 , 50 L.Ed. which the Court struck down an immu- 652 that "if the criminality has already nity statute because it failed to measure been taken away, the Amendment ceases up to the standards set forth in Counsel- to apply." In other words, the immunity man. | 1 | 2015–2015 |
Albertson v. Subversive Activities Control Board
green
2 sentences2015The make the privilege applicable when irrelevance of Murphy to such a situa- there was a mere possibility of a crim- tion was made clear in Albertson v. Sub- inal charge being made. versive Activities Control Board, 382 U. The Court said in Hale v. Henkel, 201 S. 70, 86 S.Ct. 194 , 15 L.Ed.2d 165 , in U.S. 43, 67, 26 S.Ct. 370, 376 , 50 L.Ed. which the Court struck down an immu- 652 that "if the criminality has already nity statute because it failed to measure been taken away, the Amendment ceases up to the standards set forth in Counsel- to apply." In other words, the immunity man. 2015The make the privilege applicable when irrelevance of Murphy to such a situa- there was a mere possibility of a crim- tion was made clear in Albertson v. Sub- inal charge being made. versive Activities Control Board, 382 U. The Court said in Hale v. Henkel, 201 S. 70, 86 S.Ct. 194 , 15 L.Ed.2d 165 , in U.S. 43, 67, 26 S.Ct. 370, 376 , 50 L.Ed. which the Court struck down an immu- 652 that "if the criminality has already nity statute because it failed to measure been taken away, the Amendment ceases up to the standards set forth in Counsel- to apply." In other words, the immunity man. | 1 | 2015–2015 |
Gibson v. State
green
2 sentences1978In Gibson v. State, 532 S.W.2d 69 (Tex.Cr.App.1976), we recommended that upon entry of a guilty plea the trial court make inquiry as to whether such plea is the result of negotiations and, if so, determine the terms of the agreement. 1978In Gibson v. State, 532 S.W.2d 69 (Tex.Cr.App.1976), we recommended that upon entry of a guilty plea the trial court make inquiry as to whether such plea is the result of negotiations and, if so, determine the terms of the agreement. | 1 | 1978–1978 |
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.