Case law

Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. Wal-Mart Stores East, Lp Wal-Mart Louisiana, LLC Sam's East, Inc. And Sam's West, Inc. v. Xerox State & Local Solutions, Inc. A/K/A/, F/K/A Acs State & Local Solutions, Inc.

Texas Supreme Court · Mar 17, 2023

Wal-Mart contends that Section 274.8(e)(1) does not provide Xerox with “blanket immunity . . . no matter what it did” and instead contemplates the retailer assuming liability for losses only as against the 24 7 … This would qualify. We have not been broadcasting it at all but if retailers are using [stand-in vouchers], then we will have some liability.”

Texas Coast Utilities Coalition v. Railroad Commission

57 Tex. Sup. Ct. J. 178 · Texas Supreme Court · Jan 17, 2014

As a result, gas utilities in Texas “are by definition monopolies in the areas they serve” and are thus immune from “the normal forces of competition that regulate prices” in the open market. Tex. Util. … If a statute is worded clearly, we must honor its plain language, unless that interpretation would lead to absurd results.”); City of Round Rock v.

Diversicare General Partner, Inc., Diversicare Leasing Corporation, Advocat, Inc., and Texas Diversicare Limited Partnership D/B/A Goliad Manor v. Maria G. Rubio and Mary Holcomb as Next Friend of Maria G. Rubio

Texas Supreme Court · Oct 14, 2005

Rubio’s pleadings do not clearly establish whether all of her claims pertain to breach of the “applicable standard of care for health care providers,” MacGregor Med. … Because the pleadings in this case did not allege facts establishing whether Ms.

in Re Michael N. Blair

Texas Supreme Court · Aug 23, 2013

The Comptroller again denied Blair’s application, this time because “he is currently incarcerated” and “[t]he Legislature clearly intends [compensation under the Act] to be provided only to eligible applicants in order … Further, a prosecutor, knowing that an inmate charged with a crime was about to qualify for compensation, might delay criminal proceedings to ensure that payments would be denied.

Johnson, Matthew Lee

Texas Supreme Court · Jan 13, 2015

Appellant failed to establish a prima facie case of discrimination, but the issue is moot. … jurors are qualified.

Chicago, R. I. & G. Ry. Co. v. Tarrant County Water Control & Improvement Dist. No. 1

123 Tex. 432 · Texas Supreme Court · May 30, 1934

The evidence quoted above also clearly shows that the streams named are navigable in law under a statute which has existed in this state since it was an independent republic. Rev. St. art. 5302; Motl v. … But it is now clearly established, in this state, as in most states, that the company so builds its road subject to the reserved right of the public to lay out highways, locate drams, or establish or improve water ways across

Donald Davis v. Fisk Electric Company, Fisk Technologies & Fisk Management, Inc.

Texas Supreme Court · Sep 26, 2008

IV Standard of Review In contrast to the federal system, which employs a “clearly erroneous” standard of review, we review a trial court’s Batson ruling for abuse of discretion. … Donaldson: I have to qualify that. Prescott : I’ll qualify my answer. Davis counsel: I’d like your qualifications. Donaldson: It depends on the amount. Davis counsel: I can’t see. Can you hold it up, please? 47?

In the Interest of McLean

30 Tex. Sup. Ct. J. 206 · Texas Supreme Court · Feb 11, 1987

Sex is clearly listed in the amendment along with other classifications afforded maximum constitutional protection. … It has been almost four years since the child was born and Wise has been denied every effort to establish an ongoing relationship with his son.

City of Houston v. Clark

49 Tex. Sup. Ct. J. 887 · Texas Supreme Court · Jun 30, 2006

Clark next argues that Section 143.1016© does not create a right to appeal, but merely defines the contours of the right established in Section 143.1016(c). … Clearly, the two provisions are not compatible and it was unclear whether employees were authorized to appeal a hearing examiner’s decision after 1985.

Deloitte & Touche LLP v. Fourteenth Court of Appeals

951 S.W.2d 394 · Texas Supreme Court · Oct 2, 1997

. *397 A party seeking mandamus relief must establish the lack of an adequate appellate remedy. See Walker, 827 S.W.2d at 840 . Deloitte & Touche has a remedy by appeal. … Deloitte & Touche has not established its right to relief by mandamus, and we choose not to exercise our mandamus power under the circumstances of this case.

Johnson v. Newberry

267 S.W. 476 · Texas Supreme Court · Dec 20, 1924

Boarding, lodging, food, medicine, and education are clearly necessaries. The Supreme Court of Maine, in the case of Utterstrom v. … Which it should be is clearly dependent upon the circumstances in each individual case.

City of Austin v. Harry M. Whittington

55 Tex. Sup. Ct. J. 1245 · Texas Supreme Court · Aug 31, 2012

Mere bad judgment does not qualify as bad faith. … We conclude the evidence conclusively establishes that the parking garage is a public building.

TXI Transportation Co. v. Hughes

53 Tex. Sup. Ct. J. 431 · Texas Supreme Court · Mar 12, 2010

Rodriguez’s immigration status clearly was not a material part of the plaintiffs’ case; it was not something the plaintiffs had to prove to prevail. See Bates v. … The witness also qualified his testimony about the gravel truck not crossing the center line by saying "[n]ot to my knowledge” multiple times.

Stewart Title Guaranty Co. v. Sterling

822 S.W.2d 1 · Texas Supreme Court · Feb 12, 1992

These factors clearly establish the punitive intent of the provision; therefore, application of the credit prior to trebling would frustrate this legislative purpose. … Merely because actual damages are established by the jury does not necessarily mean that the plaintiff may recover them.

Transport Insurance Co. v. Faircloth

898 S.W.2d 269 · Texas Supreme Court · Jun 15, 1995

McGee is clearly distinguishable from this case. In McGee , an insurer offered to settle an injured worker’s compensation claim for an amount the insurer had calculated on the basis of partial disability. … We will not embrace a holding that disqualifies the vast majority of well-qualified lawyers from handling settlements. C.

In Re United Services Automobile Ass'n

53 Tex. Sup. Ct. J. 485 · Texas Supreme Court · Mar 26, 2010

Moreover, when elements of a statutory claim involve “the jurisdictional inquiry of sovereign immunity from suit,” those elements can be relevant to both jurisdiction and liability. State v. … In reaching that conclusion, the Court adopted a “readily administrable bright line” rule: If the Legislature clearly states that a threshold limitation on a statute’s scope shall count as jurisdictional, then courts and

Universal Underwriters Insurance Co. v. Ferguson

14 Tex. Sup. Ct. J. 465 · Texas Supreme Court · Jul 21, 1971

These statements are so qualified that they do not raise an issue of fact concerning the rendition of the judgment of dismissal on October 23, 1970. … See also Federal District Court Rule 60, which establishes reinstatement proceedings and abolishes bills of review for such purposes. Title 28 U.S.C.A. Chapt.

Hexter Title & Abstract Co. v. Grievance Committee

142 Tex. 506 · Texas Supreme Court · May 3, 1944

The Act clearly conferred upon the State Bar all powers reasonably necessary to prohibit those not members of the State Bar from practicing law. … Here the corporation holds itself out as being qualified to perform these legal services, and it has done so with continuity for the purpose of increasing the legitimate business of its principal.

in Re National Lloyds Insurance Company, Wardlaw Claims Service, Inc. and Ideal Adjusting, Inc.

532 S.W.3d 794 · Texas Supreme Court · Jun 9, 2017

Co., 772 S.W.2d 72, 75 (Tex. 1989) (“[T]he objecting party must assume the burden of establishing its privilege, immunity or other objection to the discovery request.” (emphasis added)). … to establish the reasonableness or necessity of the attorney fees an opposing party has incurred.

the State of Texas v. Volkswagen Aktiengesellschaft

Texas Supreme Court · Nov 18, 2022

I, § 19 (“No citizen of this State shall be deprived of life, liberty, property, privileges or immunities, or in any manner disfranchised, except by the due course of the law of the land.”). … GOV’T CODE § 402.021 (establishing the Attorney General’s duty to “prosecute and defend all actions in which the state is interested before the supreme court and courts of appeals”).