6 Texas opinions name it 1 courts 1907–2015 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 |
|---|---|---|
Altman v. Blakegreen1 sentence2013See Altman v. Blake, 712 S.W.2d 117, 118 (Tex.1986) (providing that we must determine the parties’ intentions as expressed within the four corners of the instrument). 10 . | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Texas. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Chandler v. Welborn
green
2 sentences1958The administratrix has appealed from said judgment on forty-six points of error, which are substantially as follows: points alleging there are no pleadings or evidence to support the judgment; points that appellant has been denied her civil rights and equal protection of the law and deprived of her property, without due process of the law contrary to Section 1 of Amendment 14 *894 of the Constitution of the United States and Section 19 of Article 1 of the Constitution of the State of Texas; points asserting that the ninety day period of limitation provided for in Article 3522 should be applied 1958The administratrix has appealed from said judgment on forty-six points of error, which are substantially as follows: points *900 alleging there are no pleadings or evidence to support the judgment; points that appellant has been denied her civil rights and equal protection of the law and deprived of her property without due process of the law contrary to Section 1 of Amendment 14 of the Constitution of the United States and Section 19 of Article 1 of the Constitution of the State of Texas, Vernon’s Ann.St.; points asserting that the ninety day period of limitation provided for in Article 3522 | 3 | 1958–1958 |
Chandler v. Welborn
neutral
2 sentences1958The administratrix has appealed from said judgment on forty-six points of error, which are substantially as follows: points alleging there are no pleadings or evidence to support the judgment; points that appellant has been denied her civil rights and equal protection of the law and deprived of her property, without due process of the law contrary to Section 1 of Amendment 14 *894 of the Constitution of the United States and Section 19 of Article 1 of the Constitution of the State of Texas; points asserting that the ninety day period of limitation provided for in Article 3522 should be applied 1958The administratrix has appealed from said judgment on forty-six points of error, which are substantially as follows: points *900 alleging there are no pleadings or evidence to support the judgment; points that appellant has been denied her civil rights and equal protection of the law and deprived of her property without due process of the law contrary to Section 1 of Amendment 14 of the Constitution of the United States and Section 19 of Article 1 of the Constitution of the State of Texas, Vernon’s Ann.St.; points asserting that the ninety day period of limitation provided for in Article 3522 | 3 | 1958–1958 |
Moses H. Cone Memorial Hospital v. Mercury Construction Corp.
green
1 sentence2015Id., at 29-30 . | 1 | 2015–2015 |
Hines v. Ament
neutral
1 sentence1907Hines v. Ament, 43 Mo., 298 ; Matson v. Calhoun, 44 Mo., 368 . | 1 | 1907–1907 |
Matson v. Calhoun
neutral
1 sentence1907Hines v. Ament, 43 Mo., 298 ; Matson v. Calhoun, 44 Mo., 368 . | 1 | 1907–1907 |
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.