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 1 courts 2004–2022 1 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 |
|---|---|---|
In the Interest of Rodriguezgreen2 sentences2022Several courts of appeals have held that the § 153.131(b) presumption is subject to the Saenz analysis—that is, “once the party seeking appointment as sole managing conservator introduces evidence to rebut the presumption, it disappears.” Turrubiartes v. Olvera, 539 S.W.3d 524, 528 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2018, –9– pet. denied); accord Lide v. Lide, 116 S.W.3d 147, 152 (Tex. App.—El Paso 2003, no pet.); In re Marriage of Robinson, 16 S.W.3d 451, 454 (Tex. App.—Waco 2000, no pet.); In re Rodriguez, 940 S.W.2d 265, 271 (Tex. App.—San Antonio 1997, writ denied). 2022Several courts of appeals have held that the § 153.131(b) presumption is subject to the Saenz analysis—that is, “once the party seeking appointment as sole managing conservator introduces evidence to rebut the presumption, it disappears.” Turrubiartes v. Olvera, 539 S.W.3d 524, 528 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2018, –9– pet. denied); accord Lide v. Lide, 116 S.W.3d 147, 152 (Tex. App.—El Paso 2003, no pet.); In re Marriage of Robinson, 16 S.W.3d 451, 454 (Tex. App.—Waco 2000, no pet.); In re Rodriguez, 940 S.W.2d 265, 271 (Tex. App.—San Antonio 1997, writ denied). | 1 | 1 |
Lide v. Lidegreen2 sentences2022Several courts of appeals have held that the § 153.131(b) presumption is subject to the Saenz analysis—that is, “once the party seeking appointment as sole managing conservator introduces evidence to rebut the presumption, it disappears.” Turrubiartes v. Olvera, 539 S.W.3d 524, 528 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2018, –9– pet. denied); accord Lide v. Lide, 116 S.W.3d 147, 152 (Tex. App.—El Paso 2003, no pet.); In re Marriage of Robinson, 16 S.W.3d 451, 454 (Tex. App.—Waco 2000, no pet.); In re Rodriguez, 940 S.W.2d 265, 271 (Tex. App.—San Antonio 1997, writ denied). 2022Several courts of appeals have held that the § 153.131(b) presumption is subject to the Saenz analysis—that is, “once the party seeking appointment as sole managing conservator introduces evidence to rebut the presumption, it disappears.” Turrubiartes v. Olvera, 539 S.W.3d 524, 528 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2018, –9– pet. denied); accord Lide v. Lide, 116 S.W.3d 147, 152 (Tex. App.—El Paso 2003, no pet.); In re Marriage of Robinson, 16 S.W.3d 451, 454 (Tex. App.—Waco 2000, no pet.); In re Rodriguez, 940 S.W.2d 265, 271 (Tex. App.—San Antonio 1997, writ denied). | 1 | 1 |
In Re Marriage of Robinsongreen2 sentences2022Several courts of appeals have held that the § 153.131(b) presumption is subject to the Saenz analysis—that is, “once the party seeking appointment as sole managing conservator introduces evidence to rebut the presumption, it disappears.” Turrubiartes v. Olvera, 539 S.W.3d 524, 528 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2018, –9– pet. denied); accord Lide v. Lide, 116 S.W.3d 147, 152 (Tex. App.—El Paso 2003, no pet.); In re Marriage of Robinson, 16 S.W.3d 451, 454 (Tex. App.—Waco 2000, no pet.); In re Rodriguez, 940 S.W.2d 265, 271 (Tex. App.—San Antonio 1997, writ denied). 2022Several courts of appeals have held that the § 153.131(b) presumption is subject to the Saenz analysis—that is, “once the party seeking appointment as sole managing conservator introduces evidence to rebut the presumption, it disappears.” Turrubiartes v. Olvera, 539 S.W.3d 524, 528 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2018, –9– pet. denied); accord Lide v. Lide, 116 S.W.3d 147, 152 (Tex. App.—El Paso 2003, no pet.); In re Marriage of Robinson, 16 S.W.3d 451, 454 (Tex. App.—Waco 2000, no pet.); In re Rodriguez, 940 S.W.2d 265, 271 (Tex. App.—San Antonio 1997, writ denied). | 1 | 1 |
Turrubiartes v. Olveragreen2 sentences2022Several courts of appeals have held that the § 153.131(b) presumption is subject to the Saenz analysis—that is, “once the party seeking appointment as sole managing conservator introduces evidence to rebut the presumption, it disappears.” Turrubiartes v. Olvera, 539 S.W.3d 524, 528 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2018, –9– pet. denied); accord Lide v. Lide, 116 S.W.3d 147, 152 (Tex. App.—El Paso 2003, no pet.); In re Marriage of Robinson, 16 S.W.3d 451, 454 (Tex. App.—Waco 2000, no pet.); In re Rodriguez, 940 S.W.2d 265, 271 (Tex. App.—San Antonio 1997, writ denied). 2022Several courts of appeals have held that the § 153.131(b) presumption is subject to the Saenz analysis—that is, “once the party seeking appointment as sole managing conservator introduces evidence to rebut the presumption, it disappears.” Turrubiartes v. Olvera, 539 S.W.3d 524, 528 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2018, –9– pet. denied); accord Lide v. Lide, 116 S.W.3d 147, 152 (Tex. App.—El Paso 2003, no pet.); In re Marriage of Robinson, 16 S.W.3d 451, 454 (Tex. App.—Waco 2000, no pet.); In re Rodriguez, 940 S.W.2d 265, 271 (Tex. App.—San Antonio 1997, writ denied). | 1 | 1 |
Jackson v. Stategreen1 sentence2014Jackson v. State, 17 S.W.3d 664, 670 (Tex.Crim.App.2000). | 1 | 1 |
McMahan v. Greenwoodgreen1 sentence2008See id. | 1 | 1 |
Beltran v. Stategreen1 sentence2004See Bel-tran, 30 S.W.3d at 533 n. 1. | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Texas. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Ex parte Saenz
green
2 sentences2019Id. at 826-27 . 2019Id. at 827 . | 1 | 2019–2019 |
Erdman v. State
green
1 sentence2014On appeal, the State argues the trial court erroneously relied on Erdman v. State, 861 S.W.2d 890 (Tex.Crim.App. 1993) in granting Saenz’s motion to suppress and Saenz’s consent was valid under the totality of the circumstances. | 1 | 2014–2014 |