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.
5 canonical passages across 4 cases, quoted by 27 opinions in total. These passages cluster together because the same opinions keep quoting them side by side: they state parts of one doctrine. The anchor passage is from Combs v. City of Webster.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Combs v. City of Webster Anchor | green | “to the extent that no rule as defined by the apa is at issue, section 2001.038 does not provide any basis for the district court's jurisdiction over appellees' declaratory judgment action” | 9 |
| 2 | Texas Logos, L.P. v. Texas Department of Transportation | green | “it is alleged that the rule or its threatened application interferes with or impairs, or threatens to interfere with or impair, a legal right or privilege of the plaintiff.” | 6 |
| 3 | Texas Mutual Insurance Co. v. Vista Community Medical Center, LLP | green | “the 2005 staff report did not affect private rights because it did not change or amend” | 4 |
| 4 | Texas Department of Public Safety v. Salazar | green | “agency statements that 'have no effect on private persons' are not considered rules” | 4 |
| 5 | Texas Logos, L.P. v. Texas Department of Transportation | green | “the rule or its threatened application interferes with or impairs, or threatens to interfere with or impair, a legal right or privilege of the plaintiff.” | 4 |
A red or yellow flag on a member means the underlying case has negative treatment: for those, check the case page before relying on the passage.