Topic: did not testify that he would have recommended against pros… · Go Syfert
← All topics

Topic #19382

7 canonical passages across 6 cases, quoted by 21 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 King v. Graham.

#Case FlagCanonical passage Citers
1 King v. Graham Anchor
tex · 2003
green “did not testify that he would have recommended against prosecution or that sutton would have followed that recommendation.” 3
2 King v. Graham
tex · 2003
green “the evidence offered to prove a vital fact is so weak as to do no more than create a mere surmise or suspicion of its existence, the evidence is no more than a scintilla and, in legal effect, is no evidence” 3
3 Fraga v. Drake
texapp · 2008
green “then, when i was not making the monthly note payments on the home because they told me i could use the money for the repairs instead, and they made their confession to me in february 2002, i then filed suit.” 3
4 B & H Aircraft Sales, Inc. v. Engine Components, Inc.
texapp · 1996
green “lay a foundation outlining exactly what specific representations were made and relied upon” 3
5 John Paul Mitchell Systems v. Randalls Food Markets, Inc.
texapp · 2000
green “must be some act interfering with a contract or act persuading a party to a contract to breach; for example, offering better terms or other incentives” 3
6 Reynolds v. Murphy
texapp · 2006
green “uphold the trial court's evidentiary ruling if there is any legitimate basis in the record for the ruling.” 3
7 Southtex 66 Pipeline Co., Ltd. v. Spoor
texapp · 2007
green “a mere surmise or suspicion of fact,” 3

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.

← Caselaw search · Hot / Trending / Newly red · Brief Check