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 1980–2021 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 |
|---|---|---|
Craddock v. Sunshine Bus Lines, Inc.green1 sentence2021See Craddock, 133 S.W.2d at 126 . | 1 | 1 |
Zarzana v. Ashleygreen1 sentence2011See Zarzana v. Ashley , 218 S.W.3d 152, 158 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 2007, pet. struck). | 1 | 1 |
In Re Southwestern Bell Telephone Co. Lpgreen1 sentence2010Co., L.P., 235 S.W.3d 619, 627 (Tex.2007) (orig.proceeding) (granting mandamus relief from denial of Southwestern Bell’s plea to the jurisdiction); Nat’l Indus. | 1 | 1 |
National Industrial Sand Ass'n v. Gibsongreen1 sentence2010Sand Ass’n v. Gibson, 897 S.W.2d 769, 776 (Tex.1995) (orig.proceeding) (granting mandamus relief to correct erroneous assertion of personal jurisdiction over nonresident defendant). | 1 | 1 |
Owens-Corning Fiberglas Corp. v. Malonegreen1 sentence2010Owens-Corning Fiberglas Corp. v. Malone, 972 S.W.2d 35, 43 (Tex.1998). | 1 | 1 |
Stiles v. Resolution Trust Corp.green1 sentence2002Stiles v. Resolution Trust Corp. , 867 S.W.2d 24, 26 (Tex. 1993). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Texas. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Southwestern Bell Telephone Co. v. Dixon
green
1 sentence1980The court of civil appeals reversed the judgment and rendered a take-nothing judgment against the plaintiffs, holding that the undisputed facts in the case established Southwestern Bell’s defense of conditional privilege to conduct an investigation and that there was no evidence of malice *241 which would overcome the privilege. 575 S.W.2d 596 . | 1 | 1980–1980 |