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 5 cases, quoted by 15 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 Adams v. Baxter Healthcare Corp..
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Adams v. Baxter Healthcare Corp. Anchor | green | “the mere fact that a trial court may decide a matter within its discretionary authority in a different manner than an appellate court in a similar circumstance does not demonstrate that an abuse of discretion has occurred.” | 3 |
| 2 | In Re Ben E. Keith Co., Inc. | green | “not so interwoven with the personal injury action that they involve the same facts and issues, they were properly severable.” | 3 |
| 3 | In Re Foremost Insurance Co. | green | “severance of claims under the texas rules of civil procedure rests within the sound discretion of the trial court.” | 3 |
| 4 | Landers v. East Texas Salt Water Disposal Co. | green | “where the tortious acts of two or more wrongdoers join to produce an indivisible injury, that is, an injury which from its nature cannot be apportioned with reasonable certainty to the individual wrongdoers . . . the injured party may proceed to judgment . . . against all in one…” | 3 |
| 5 | Hamilton v. Hamilton | green | “a trial court properly exercises its discretion in severing claims when: (1) the controversy involves more than one cause of action; (2) the severed claim is one that could be asserted independently in a separate lawsuit; and (3) the severed actions are not so interwoven with th…” | 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.