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.
43 Texas opinions name it 2 courts 1998–2026 15 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 |
|---|---|---|
Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. v. Lenkgreen2 sentences2025Corp. v. Lenk, 361 S.W.3d 602, 604 (Tex. 2012) (“When a party fails to preserve error in the trial court . . . , an appellate court may not consider the unpreserved or waived issue.”). 2025See FDIC v. Lenk, 361 S.W.3d 602, 604 (Tex. 2012) (“When a party fails to preserve error in the trial court . . . , an appellate court may not consider the unpreserved or waived issue.”). | 13 | 13 |
Lovill v. Stategreen2 sentences2023Lovill v. State, 319 S.W.3d 687 691–92 (Tex. Crim. 2018See Lovill v. State, 319 S.W.3d 687 , 691–92 (Tex. Crim. | 7 | 9 |
Rothstein v. Stategreen2 sentences2016See Lovill v. State, 319 S.W.3d 687, 691-92 (Tex.Crim.App.2009); Rothstein v. State, 267 S.W.3d 366, 373 (Tex.App.-Houston [14th Dist.] 2008, pet. ref'd). 2015See Rothstein, 267 S.W.3d at 373 . | 5 | 6 |
Clark v. Stategreen2 sentences2026Clark v. State, 365 S.W.3d 333, 339 (Tex. Crim. 2025Clark v. State, 365 S.W.3d 333, 339 (Tex. Crim. | 3 | 3 |
C.M. Asfahl Agency v. Tensor Inc.green2 sentences2021Asfahl Agency v. Tensor, Inc., 135 S.W.3d 768, 785 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2004, no pet.) (“A party fails to preserve error . . . when that party waives, or invites, the alleged error. . . .”). 2016Asfahl Agency v. Tensor, Inc., 135 S.W.3d 768, 785 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2004, no pet.) (“A party fails to preserve error in the jury charge when that party waives, or invites, the alleged error by acquiescing to [or] submitting a theory that the party 7 Merit also submitted a proposed question asking the jury to interpret the conveyances. | 3 | 3 |
In Re MSgreen2 sentences2024P. 33.1(a) (“As a prerequisite to presenting a complaint for appellate review...”); Federal Deposit Ins. v. Lenk, 361 S.W.3d 602, 604 (Tex. 2012) (“When a party fails to preserve error in the trial court or waives an argument on appeal, an appellate court may not consider the unpreserved or waived issue.”); In re M.S., 115 S.W.3d 534, 547 (Tex. 2003) (describing error preservation as “threshold to appellate review”); Alikhan v. Alikhan, No. 03-19-00515-CV, 2021 WL 3085844 , at *3 (Tex. App.—Austin July 22, 2021, pet. denied) (mem. op.). 2021App. P. 33.1(a) (“As a prerequisite to presenting a complaint for appellate review . . . .”); Federal Deposit Ins. v. Lenk, 361 S.W.3d 602, 604 (Tex. 2012) (“When a party fails to preserve error in the trial court or waives an argument on appeal, an appellate court may not consider the unpreserved or waived issue.”); In re M.S., 115 S.W.3d 534, 547 (Tex. 2003) (describing error preservation as “threshold to appellate review”); In re C.O.S., 988 S.W.2d at 765 (“Generally, our civil rules of procedure and our decisions thereunder require a party to apprise a trial court of its error before that | 2 | 2 |
Marin v. IESI TX CORP.green2 sentences2019See Marin v. IESI TX Corp., 317 S.W.3d 314, 324 (Tex. App.–Houston [1st Dist.] 2010, pet. filed). 2011See Marin v. IESI TX Corp., 317 S.W.3d 314, 324 (Tex.App.-Houston [1st Dist.] 2010, pet. filed). | 2 | 2 |
Harris v. Stategreen2 sentences2010See Harris v. State, 827 S.W.2d 949, 957-58 (Tex. Crim. 2010See Harris v. State , 827 S.W.2d 949, 957-58 (Tex. Crim. | 2 | 2 |
Blackshear, George Edwardgreen1 sentence2024Blackshear v. State, 385 S.W.3d 589, 591 (Tex. Crim. | 1 | 1 |
Cecil v. Smithgreen1 sentence2021App. P. 33.1(a) (“As a prerequisite to presenting a complaint for appellate review . . . .”); Federal Deposit Ins. v. Lenk, 361 S.W.3d 602, 604 (Tex. 2012) (“When a party fails to preserve error in the trial court or waives an argument on appeal, an appellate court may not consider the unpreserved or waived issue.”); In re M.S., 115 S.W.3d 534, 547 (Tex. 2003) (describing error preservation as “threshold to appellate review”); In re C.O.S., 988 S.W.2d at 765 (“Generally, our civil rules of procedure and our decisions thereunder require a party to apprise a trial court of its error before that | 1 | 1 |
In Re COSgreen1 sentence2021App. P. 33.1(a) (“As a prerequisite to presenting a complaint for appellate review . . . .”); Federal Deposit Ins. v. Lenk, 361 S.W.3d 602, 604 (Tex. 2012) (“When a party fails to preserve error in the trial court or waives an argument on appeal, an appellate court may not consider the unpreserved or waived issue.”); In re M.S., 115 S.W.3d 534, 547 (Tex. 2003) (describing error preservation as “threshold to appellate review”); In re C.O.S., 988 S.W.2d at 765 (“Generally, our civil rules of procedure and our decisions thereunder require a party to apprise a trial court of its error before that | 1 | 1 |
Massey v. Columbus State Bankgreen1 sentence2020Craddock v. Sunshine Bus Lines, Inc., 133 S.W.2d 124, 126 (Tex. [Comm’n Op.] 1939); see Massey v. Columbus State Bank, 35 S.W.3d 697, 699 (Tex. App.— Houston [1st Dist.] 2000, pet. denied) (discussing Tex. R. | 1 | 1 |
Craddock v. Sunshine Bus Lines, Inc.green1 sentence2020Craddock v. Sunshine Bus Lines, Inc., 133 S.W.2d 124, 126 (Tex. [Comm’n Op.] 1939); see Massey v. Columbus State Bank, 35 S.W.3d 697, 699 (Tex. App.— Houston [1st Dist.] 2000, pet. denied) (discussing Tex. R. | 1 | 1 |
Thomas v. Stategreen1 sentence2018See Clark v. State, 365 S.W.3d 333, 339 (Tex.Crim.App. 2012), citing Thomas v. State, 723 S.W.2d 696, 700 (Tex.Crim.App. 1986). | 1 | 1 |
Lankston v. Stategreen1 sentence2018A party “must be specific enough so as to ‘let the trial [court] know what he wants, why he thinks himself entitled to it, and do so clearly enough for the [trial court] to understand him at a time when the trial court is in a proper position to do something about it.’” Id. at 313 , quoting Lankston v. State, 827 S.W.2d 907, 909 (Tex.Crim.App. 1992). 22 Also, a party fails to preserve error when the contention urged on appeal does not comport with the specific complaint made in the trial court. | 1 | 1 |
Nelson v. Big Woods Springs Improvement Ass'ngreen1 sentence2016El-Khoury v. Kheir, 241 S.W.3d at 91 ; see also Nelson v. Big Woods Springs Improvement Ass’n, Inc., 322 S.W.3d 678 , 684–85 (Tex. App.— Texarkana 2010, pet. denied). -7- 04-15-00571-CV Review of the City’s response to Continental Homes’s motion for summary judgment and its own motion for summary judgment reveals the City did not challenge the applicability of the Declaratory Judgments Act with regard to an award of attorney’s fees. | 1 | 1 |
Wilson v. Stategreen1 sentence2013Wilson, 71 S.W.3d at 349 (Tex.Crim.App.2002); Roth-stein, 267 S.W.3d at 373 . | 1 | 1 |
Volkswagen of America, Inc. v. Ramirezgreen1 sentence2011Volkswagen of Am., Inc. v. Ramirez, 159 S.W.3d 897, 907 (Tex.2004), Thus, a party fails to preserve error if it does not object to the same or similar evidence that is offered by the opposing party. | 1 | 1 |
Crum v. Stategreen1 sentence1998Crum v. State, 946 S.W.2d 349, 363 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 1997, pet. ref'd)(holding failure to preserve error with regard to motion for severance where record contained no ruling). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Texas. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Sorto v. State
green
1 sentence2025Clark, 365 S.W.3d at 339 ; Sorto, 173 S.W.3d at 476 . | 1 | 2025–2025 |
Resendez v. State
green
1 sentence2018A party “must be specific enough so as to ‘let the trial [court] know what he wants, why he thinks himself entitled to it, and do so clearly enough for the [trial court] to understand him at a time when the trial court is in a proper position to do something about it.’” Id. at 313 , quoting Lankston v. State, 827 S.W.2d 907, 909 (Tex.Crim.App. 1992). 22 Also, a party fails to preserve error when the contention urged on appeal does not comport with the specific complaint made in the trial court. | 1 | 2018–2018 |
El-Khoury v. Kheir
green
1 sentence2016El-Khoury v. Kheir, 241 S.W.3d at 91 ; see also Nelson v. Big Woods Springs Improvement Ass’n, Inc., 322 S.W.3d 678 , 684–85 (Tex. App.— Texarkana 2010, pet. denied). -7- 04-15-00571-CV Review of the City’s response to Continental Homes’s motion for summary judgment and its own motion for summary judgment reveals the City did not challenge the applicability of the Declaratory Judgments Act with regard to an award of attorney’s fees. | 1 | 2016–2016 |
Guadalupe-Blanco River Authority v. Kraft
green
1 sentence2015In Guadalupe-Blanco River Authority v. Kraft, the Court stated that ″a party must object to the testimony before trial or when it is offered.″ Guadalupe-Blanco River Auth., 77 S.W.3d at 807 . | 1 | 2015–2015 |
Taylor v. State
green
1 sentence2015Is there any Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure that empowers Justice Dauphinot to sua sponte re-determine the validity of an 64 Roberson, 2015 WL 148476 at *9 . 65 264 S.W.3d. 914 (Tex. App.—Fort Worth 2008, no pet.). 66 Juarez, 2009 WL 1564926 . 13 appellate point when the panel hearing the case did not reach the merits and she wasn’t even a member of the panel? | 1 | 2015–2015 |
Ex Parte Byrias Roberson
green
1 sentence2015Is there any Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure that empowers Justice Dauphinot to sua sponte re-determine the validity of an 64 Roberson, 2015 WL 148476 at *9 . 65 264 S.W.3d. 914 (Tex. App.—Fort Worth 2008, no pet.). 66 Juarez, 2009 WL 1564926 . 13 appellate point when the panel hearing the case did not reach the merits and she wasn’t even a member of the panel? | 1 | 2015–2015 |
Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.
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.