Requirements for a valid order of commitment
Also stated as: Commitment Order Validity and Modification Procedures
The pages courts cite for it
- Cited for: Requirements for a valid order of commitment
- Cited for: Determining short and reasonable time for commitment order
- Cited for: Defining a legally sufficient commitment order
- Cited for: Determining the standard for temporary commitment orders
- Cited for: Requiring clear and unambiguous release conditions in commitment orders
- Cited for: Determining short and reasonable time for signing commitment orders
- Cited for: Commitment order must be read with contempt order
- Cited for: Modifying commitment orders and finality of orders
Ranked by how often Texas courts cite each page. The bar is how citing opinions treated that page (green followed, yellow questioned or limited, red negative); a red or yellow chip is the case’s own overall treatment.
Texas opinions citing these pages
- In re Dooley, 129 S.W.3d 277 (Tex. App.—Corpus Christi 2004)
- In re Maria C. Dooley, No. 13-04-00026-CV (Tex. App.—Corpus Christi Mar. 4, 2004)
- In re Gyanendra Patra, No. 01-20-00651-CV, 2020 WL 7502495 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] Dec. 22, 2020)
- In re Kristina Shea Cook, No. 07-18-00348-CV (Tex. App.—Amarillo Oct. 30, 2018)
- In re Jeffrey C. Grimm, No. 01-16-00062-CV (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] Aug. 30, 2016)
- Stanley, Andria, No. PD-1018-15 (Tex. Oct. 22, 2015)
- In re S.W., No. 02-15-00232-CV (Tex. App.—Fort Worth Aug. 31, 2015)
- In re Stacie Lynn Depeau, No. 14-14-00693-CV, 2014 WL 4952427 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] Oct. 2, 2014)
- In re Christopher Spates, No. 14-14-00525-CV (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] July 15, 2014)
- In re Clifford Hall, No. 14-14-00062-CV (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] May 28, 2014)
- In re Hall, 433 S.W.3d 203 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 2014)
- In re Joanne Wilkie (Brochstein) Mancha, 440 S.W.3d 158 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 2013)
- In re Cary Jorge, No. 02-12-00407-CV (Tex. App.—Fort Worth Oct. 26, 2012)
- In re Marks, 365 S.W.3d 843 (Tex. App.—Fort Worth 2012)
From the opinions citing the top pages above (up to 400 per page are read), most pages cited first, then newest.
Nearest issues
- 144 opinions
- 65 opinions
- 41 opinions
- 51 opinions
- 270 opinions
- 223 opinions
- 124 opinions
- 125 opinions
Filed under: Nunc pro; Pro tunc; Orders
Where else it is alive
Opinions per jurisdiction citing these pages. A span that stops early can mean the doctrine was dropped there.
How this is built: each issue is a set of opinion pages that later courts cite for the same proposition, grouped from what the citing courts wrote. Names are machine-written from those citations; read the cases before relying on them. Search case law