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.
46 Texas opinions name it 3 courts 1908–2025 10 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 |
|---|---|---|
Cunningham v. Stategreen2 sentences2023“A defendant’s admission of a violation to a probation officer, by itself, is sufficient to support a revocation.” Anthony v. State, 962 S.W.2d 242, 246 (Tex. App.—Fort Worth 1998, no pet.); see also Hernandez v. State, 704 S.W.2d 909, 910 (Tex. App.—Waco 1986, no pet.) (citing Cunningham v. State, 488 S.W.2d 117, 121 (Tex. Crim. 2011Appellant acknowledges the holding in Cunningham v. State that a probationer's admission of a violation to his probation officer is sufficient to support a revocation. 488 S.W.2d 117, 121 (Tex. Crim. | 4 | 4 |
Hayden v. Stategreen2 sentences2006See Hayden , 66 S.W.3d at 270 . 2006See Hayden, 66 S.W.3d at 270 . | 3 | 3 |
Saldano v. Stategreen2 sentences2025Saldano v. State, 70 S.W.3d 873, 884 (Tex. Crim. 2011See Saldano v. State, 70 S.W.3d 873, 884 (Tex. Crim. | 2 | 2 |
in the Interest of A.C., a Childgreen2 sentences2024See In re A.C., 394 S.W.3d 633, 642 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2012, no pet.). 2024See In re A.C., 394 S.W.3d 633, 642 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2012, no pet.). | 2 | 2 |
Juarez v. Stategreen2 sentences2020Cf. id. 6 DISPOSITION Having overruled Appellant’s first and second issues, we affirm the trial court’s judgment. 2020See Juarez, 308 S.W.3d at 405 . | 2 | 2 |
State of Texas v. Esparza, Carlosgreen2 sentences2016See State v. Esparza, 413 S.W.3d 81, 86-87 (Tex.Crim.App. 2013) (unless the opponent raises an objection, the State, as the proponent of breath test results, was not required to present any foundational evidence to establish its reliability). 2016See State v. Esparza, 413 S.W.3d 81, 86-87 (Tex.Crim.App. 2013) (unless the opponent raises an objection, the State, as the 3 The State made clear that it intended Flowers and Ho to testify only regarding the manner in which the test results were conducted, and to have their supervisor, Dr. Robert Johnson, the Chief Toxicologist, interpret the results and explain to the jury how those results applied to Appellant’s case. | 2 | 2 |
Stein v. Hammangreen2 sentences2015Hanley, 171 S.W.2d at 865 ; see also Stein v. Hamman, 6 S.W.2d 352, 353 (Tex. 1928); see also House of Falcon v. Gonzalez, 583 S.W.2d 902, 905 (Tex. Civ. 1945Webber v. Cochrane, 4 Tex. 31 ; Howard et al. v. Windom, supra; York v. Hughes, Tex.Com.App., 286 S.W. 165 ; Stein v. Hamman et al., 118 Tex. 16 , 6 S.W.2d 352 ; 118 Tex. 16 , 9 S.W.2d 1104 ; Elsby v. Luna et ux., Tex.Com.App., 15 S.W.2d 604 ; 26 Texas Digest, Limitation of Actions, <§^148(2). | 1 | 3 |
Werner Enterprises, Inc. and Shiraz A. Ali v. Jennifer Blake, Individually and as Next Friend for Nathan Blake, and as Heir of the Estate of Zachery Blake, And Eldridge Moak, in His Capacity as Guardian of the Estate of Briana Blakegreen2 sentences2025In this case, the court of appeals held that since the Blakes pleaded gross negligence, the admission rule would not apply regardless of whether the court formally adopted it. 672 S.W.3d at 588. 2025Id. at 587-89. | 1 | 2 |
Hanley v. Oil Capital Broadcasting Ass'ngreen2 sentences2023Ass’n, 171 S.W.2d 864, 865 (1943). 2015Hanley, 171 S.W.2d at 865 ; see also Stein v. Hamman, 6 S.W.2d 352, 353 (Tex. 1928); see also House of Falcon v. Gonzalez, 583 S.W.2d 902, 905 (Tex. Civ. | 1 | 2 |
Rodgers v. McFarlandgreen1 sentence2025At least one Texas appellate court has applied the admission rule with this exception, see Arrington’s Est. v. Fields, 578 S.W.2d 173 , 178-79 (Tex. Civ. App.—Tyler 1979, writ ref’d n.r.e.), and one has applied the admission rule without it, see Rodgers v. McFarland, 402 S.W.2d 208, 210 (Tex. Civ. App.—El Paso 1966, writ ref’d n.r.e.). | 1 | 1 |
Ineos USA, LLC v. Elmgrengreen1 sentence2023See Ineos USA, 505 S.W.3d at 565 . | 1 | 1 |
Hernandez v. Stategreen1 sentence2023“A defendant’s admission of a violation to a probation officer, by itself, is sufficient to support a revocation.” Anthony v. State, 962 S.W.2d 242, 246 (Tex. App.—Fort Worth 1998, no pet.); see also Hernandez v. State, 704 S.W.2d 909, 910 (Tex. App.—Waco 1986, no pet.) (citing Cunningham v. State, 488 S.W.2d 117, 121 (Tex. Crim. | 1 | 1 |
Anthony v. Stategreen1 sentence2023“A defendant’s admission of a violation to a probation officer, by itself, is sufficient to support a revocation.” Anthony v. State, 962 S.W.2d 242, 246 (Tex. App.—Fort Worth 1998, no pet.); see also Hernandez v. State, 704 S.W.2d 909, 910 (Tex. App.—Waco 1986, no pet.) (citing Cunningham v. State, 488 S.W.2d 117, 121 (Tex. Crim. | 1 | 1 |
Walters v. Stategreen1 sentence2023The erroneous admission of evidence is generally considered non-constitutional error, Walters v. State, 247 S.W.3d 204, 219 (Tex. Crim. | 1 | 1 |
Williams v. Unifund CCR Partners Assignee of Citibankgreen1 sentence2022See Williams v. Unifund CCR Partners Assignee of Citibank, 264 S.W.3d 231 , 234–35 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2008, no pet.) (bank has cause of action to recover money or credit advanced as loan when customer does not pay credit card account and this claim does not relate to provision of goods or services because making loan does not constitute provision of goods or services). | 1 | 1 |
Shaw v. Stategreen1 sentence2020So, as stated 2 in Shaw, the “defensive instruction is only appropriate when the defendant’s defensive evidence essentially admits to every element of the offense including the culpable mental state.” Shaw, 243 S.W.3d at 659 (emphasis in original). | 1 | 1 |
Sanchez v. Stategreen1 sentence2015The court of criminal appeals determined that a hearing held under article 38.072 "is intended only to determine the reliability of the complainant’s out-of-court statement,” that the "defendant’s opportunity for cross-examining the outcry witness at such a hearing is inadequate to allow the admission of the hearing testimony at trial,” and that "admitting testimony from an Article 38.072 hearing at a trial when the witness is unavailable violates the Sixth Amendment.” Id. at 478, 489 . | 1 | 1 |
House of Falcon, Inc. v. Gonzalezgreen1 sentence2015Hanley, 171 S.W.2d at 865 ; see also Stein v. Hamman, 6 S.W.2d 352, 353 (Tex. 1928); see also House of Falcon v. Gonzalez, 583 S.W.2d 902, 905 (Tex. Civ. | 1 | 1 |
Wilson v. Stategreen1 sentence2013An appellant’s argument on appeal “must comport with the objection made at trial.” Wilson v. State, 71 S.W.3d 346, 349 (Tex. Crim. | 1 | 1 |
Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc.green1 sentence2007See Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharm., Inc ., 509 U.S. 579, 590 (1993). | 1 | 1 |
| State v. Mechlergreen | 1 | 1 |
| Bell v. Stategreen | 1 | 1 |
| Holmes v. Stategreen | 1 | 1 |
| Bridges v. City of Richardsongreen | 1 | 1 |
| Trautmann Bros. Investment Corp. v. Del Mar Conservation Districtgreen | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Texas. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Katin v. City of Lubbock
green
2 sentences2013As support for his argument, Bernal cites to Speer and Katin v. City of Lubbock, 655 S.W.2d 360 (Tex.App.-Amarillo 1983, writ ref'd n.r.e.). 2013As support for his argument, Bernal cites to Speer and Katin v. City of Lubbock, 655 S.W.2d 360 (Tex. App.—Amarillo 1983, writ ref’d n.r.e.). | 3 | 2013–2013 |
Brian Deroeck, Melinda Young, and Kathryn Boykin, Co-Trustees of the Walter A. Deroeck Qtip Trust, Assignee of Texas Capital Bank National Association v. Dhm Ventures, LLC, James W. Moritz, and Nathan W. Halsey
green
2 sentences2023DeRoeck, 556 S.W.3d at 834 . “[I]f the writing acknowledges the justness of the claim, the acknowledgment imports (1) an admission that the claim is a subsisting debt and (2) a promise to pay it, if unaccompanied by any circumstances repelling the presumption of willingness or intention to pay.” Hanley v. Oil Capital Broad. 2019App. P. 47.4. 3 Stewart, 80 S.W.3d 586, 591–92 (Tex. 2002) (per curiam) (internal quotation marks omitted). “[I]f the writing acknowledges the justness of the claim, the acknowledgment imports (1) an admission that the claim is a subsisting debt and (2) a promise to pay it, if unaccompanied by any circumstances repelling the presumption of willingness or intention to pay.” DeRoeck II, 556 S.W.3d at 834 . | 2 | 2019–2023 |
Elsby v. Luna
green
2 sentences1970It said that “ — if the writing acknowledges the justness of the claim, the acknowledgment imports (1) an admission that the claim is a subsisting debt and (2) a promise to pay it, if unaccompanied by any circumstances repelling the presumption of willingness or intention to pay.” In Elsby v. Luna (Tex.Com.App.), 15 S.W.2d 604, 605 , it was held that a promise to pay need not be expressed in the writing but would be implied, that “an unqualified and unequivocal acknowledgment in writing on the part of the debtor, of the existence of the indebtedness, unaccompanied by expressions indicating an 1945Webber v. Cochrane, 4 Tex. 31 ; Howard et al. v. Windom, supra; York v. Hughes, Tex.Com.App., 286 S.W. 165 ; Stein v. Hamman et al., 118 Tex. 16 , 6 S.W.2d 352 ; 118 Tex. 16 , 9 S.W.2d 1104 ; Elsby v. Luna et ux., Tex.Com.App., 15 S.W.2d 604 ; 26 Texas Digest, Limitation of Actions, <§^148(2). | 2 | 1945–1970 |
Callahan v. Patterson
neutral
2 sentences1945Webber v. Cochrane, 4 Tex. 31 ; Howard et al. v. Windom, supra; York v. Hughes, Tex.Com.App., 286 S.W. 165 ; Stein v. Hamman et al., 118 Tex. 16 , 6 S.W.2d 352 ; 118 Tex. 16 , 9 S.W.2d 1104 ; Elsby v. Luna et ux., Tex.Com.App., 15 S.W.2d 604 ; 26 Texas Digest, Limitation of Actions, <§^148(2). 1943And, if the writing acknowledges the justness of the claim, the acknowledgment imports (1) an admission that the claim is a subsisting debt and (2) a promise to pay it, if unaccompanied by any circumstances repelling the presumption of willingness or intention to pay; Webber v. Cochrane, 4 Texas 31 ; Howard et al v. Windom, supra; York v. Hughes (Com. | 2 | 1943–1945 |
Stein v. Hamman
green
2 sentences1945Webber v. Cochrane, 4 Tex. 31 ; Howard et al. v. Windom, supra; York v. Hughes, Tex.Com.App., 286 S.W. 165 ; Stein v. Hamman et al., 118 Tex. 16 , 6 S.W.2d 352 ; 118 Tex. 16 , 9 S.W.2d 1104 ; Elsby v. Luna et ux., Tex.Com.App., 15 S.W.2d 604 ; 26 Texas Digest, Limitation of Actions, <§^148(2). 1943App.), 286 S. W. 165 ; Stein v. Herman et al 118 Texas 16 , 6 S. W. (2d) 352 , 9 S. W. (2d) 1104 ; Elsby v. Luna et ux (Com. | 2 | 1943–1945 |
York v. Hughes
green
2 sentences1945Webber v. Cochrane, 4 Tex. 31 ; Howard et al. v. Windom, supra; York v. Hughes, Tex.Com.App., 286 S.W. 165 ; Stein v. Hamman et al., 118 Tex. 16 , 6 S.W.2d 352 ; 118 Tex. 16 , 9 S.W.2d 1104 ; Elsby v. Luna et ux., Tex.Com.App., 15 S.W.2d 604 ; 26 Texas Digest, Limitation of Actions, <§^148(2). 1943App.), 286 S. W. 165 ; Stein v. Herman et al 118 Texas 16 , 6 S. W. (2d) 352 , 9 S. W. (2d) 1104 ; Elsby v. Luna et ux (Com. | 2 | 1943–1945 |
Estate of Arrington v. Fields
green
1 sentence2025At least one Texas appellate court has applied the admission rule with this exception, see Arrington’s Est. v. Fields, 578 S.W.2d 173 , 178-79 (Tex. Civ. App.—Tyler 1979, writ ref’d n.r.e.), and one has applied the admission rule without it, see Rodgers v. McFarland, 402 S.W.2d 208, 210 (Tex. Civ. App.—El Paso 1966, writ ref’d n.r.e.). | 1 | 2025–2025 |
Qwest International Communications, Inc. v. AT & T Corp.
green
1 sentence2018The rules of civil procedure identify appropriate requests for admission as: Written requests that the other party admit the truth of any matter within the scope of discovery, including statements of opinion or of fact or of the application of law to fact, or the genuineness of any documents served with the request or otherwise made available for inspection and copying. 2 The Aranas claim Qwest International Communication, Inc. v. AT&T Corp., 167 S.W.3d 324 , 325–27 (Tex. 2005), supports their position that, by pushing to get the job done quickly, Victor Figueroa exercised control over the wor | 1 | 2018–2018 |
In Re Anastaplo
green
2 sentences2015Konigsberg v. State Bar of materials; the sanction precisely cal- California, 366 U.S. 36 , 81 S.Ct. 997 , culated to eliminate that hazard is to ex- 6 L.Ed.2d 105 ; In re Anastaplo, 366 clude the use by prosecuting authorities U.S. 82, 81 S.Ct. 978 , 6 L.Ed.2d 135 . 2015Konigsberg v. State Bar of materials; the sanction precisely cal- California, 366 U.S. 36 , 81 S.Ct. 997 , culated to eliminate that hazard is to ex- 6 L.Ed.2d 105 ; In re Anastaplo, 366 clude the use by prosecuting authorities U.S. 82, 81 S.Ct. 978 , 6 L.Ed.2d 135 . | 1 | 2015–2015 |
Konigsberg v. State Bar of Cal.
green
2 sentences2015Konigsberg v. State Bar of materials; the sanction precisely cal- California, 366 U.S. 36 , 81 S.Ct. 997 , culated to eliminate that hazard is to ex- 6 L.Ed.2d 105 ; In re Anastaplo, 366 clude the use by prosecuting authorities U.S. 82, 81 S.Ct. 978 , 6 L.Ed.2d 135 . 2015Konigsberg v. State Bar of materials; the sanction precisely cal- California, 366 U.S. 36 , 81 S.Ct. 997 , culated to eliminate that hazard is to ex- 6 L.Ed.2d 105 ; In re Anastaplo, 366 clude the use by prosecuting authorities U.S. 82, 81 S.Ct. 978 , 6 L.Ed.2d 135 . | 1 | 2015–2015 |
| Appell Petroleum Corp. v. Moreman Tire Co. green | 1 | 1970–1970 |
| Long v. Knox green | 1 | 1965–1965 |
| Stanolind Oil & Gas Co. v. State green | 1 | 1959–1959 |
| Cockrell v. Ellison neutral | 1 | 1943–1943 |
| National Bank of Commerce v. Williams green | 1 | 1941–1941 |
| Central Nat. Bank of Waco v. Lawson green | 1 | 1941–1941 |
| Smith v. Frost neutral | 1 | 1926–1926 |
| Caddell v. J. R. Watkins Medical Co. neutral | 1 | 1923–1923 |
| Louisville, New Albany & Chicago Railway Co. v. Frawley neutral | 1 | 1908–1908 |
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.