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 1983–2011 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 |
|---|---|---|
Thomas v. Uzokagreen2 sentences2011See Thomas, 290 SW.3d at 445 ; Conquest Drilling Fluids, Inc. 137 S.W.3d at 308 . ("If the error in the charge relates to a contested issue and the evidence is sharply conflicting, the error will likely require reversal.") The Trust asserts the trial court correctly denied the instructions tendered by SPLR regarding an oral agreement because any oral agreement was invalid due to the statute of frauds. 2011See Thomas, 290 SW.3d at 445 ; Conquest Drilling Fluids, Inc. 137 S.W.3d at 308 . ("If the error in the charge relates to a contested issue and the evidence is sharply conflicting, the error will likely require reversal.") The Trust asserts the trial court correctly denied the instructions tendered by SPLR regarding an oral agreement because any oral agreement was invalid due to the statute of frauds. | 2 | 2 |
Mieth v. Ranchquest, Inc.green2 sentences2009Thus, because the requested instruction would not have produced a different outcome, we cannot conclude that Thomas was harmed by the omission of the requested instruction. [3] See Mieth v. Ranchquest, Inc. , 177 S.W.3d 296, 305 (Tex. App. C Houston [1st Dist.] 2005, no pet.) ( A [T]he trial court abused its discretion by refusing to submit an instruction on negligence per se. 2009Thus, because the requested instruction would not have produced a different outcome, we cannot conclude that Thomas was harmed by the omission of the requested instruction. 3 See Mieth v. Ranchquest, Inc., 177 S.W.3d 296, 305 (Tex.App.-Houston [1st Dist.] 2005, no pet.) (“[T]he trial court abused its discretion by refusing to submit an instruction on negligence per se. | 2 | 2 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Texas. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Conquest Drilling Fluids, Inc. v. Tri-Flo International, Inc.
green
2 sentences2011See Thomas, 290 SW.3d at 445 ; Conquest Drilling Fluids, Inc. 137 S.W.3d at 308 . ("If the error in the charge relates to a contested issue and the evidence is sharply conflicting, the error will likely require reversal.") The Trust asserts the trial court correctly denied the instructions tendered by SPLR regarding an oral agreement because any oral agreement was invalid due to the statute of frauds. 2011See Thomas, 290 SW.3d at 445 ; Conquest Drilling Fluids, Inc. 137 S.W.3d at 308 . ("If the error in the charge relates to a contested issue and the evidence is sharply conflicting, the error will likely require reversal.") The Trust asserts the trial court correctly denied the instructions tendered by SPLR regarding an oral agreement because any oral agreement was invalid due to the statute of frauds. | 2 | 2011–2011 |
Crown Life Insurance Company v. Casteel
green
2 sentences2009App. P. 44.1(a)(2), and asks us to presume harm under Crown Life Insurance Co. v. Casteel . 22 S.W.3d 378 (Tex. 2000). 2009P. 44.1(a)(2), and asks us to presume harm under Crown Life Insurance Co. v. Casteel. 22 S.W.3d 378 (Tex. 2000). | 2 | 2009–2009 |
Almanza v. State
green
1 sentence1988Almanza v. State, 686 S.W.2d 157 (Tex.Crim.App.1984). | 1 | 1988–1988 |
Guadiano v. Fleishman
green
1 sentence1983The majority of the court of appeals reversed the judgment of the trial court, holding that the omission of the requested instruction was reversible error. 636 S.W.2d 785 (Tex.App.1982). | 1 | 1983–1983 |
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.