Case law

the University of Texas M.D. Anderson Cancer Center v. Lance McKenzie, Individually and as Representative of the Estate of Courtney McKenzie-thue (Deceased), and Deborah Diver, Individually and as Next Friend of J.O., a Minor

578 S.W.3d 506 · Texas Supreme Court · Jun 28, 2019

But that was clearly a medical judgment, for which the Court acknowledges immunity was not waived. … Miller, clearly testified that McKenzie-Thue's death was not foreseeable.

Daniel Walker and Kristen Walker v. Baptist St. Anthony's Hospital and Rhodesia Castillo, M.D.

Texas Supreme Court · Dec 13, 2024

Black, 392 S.W.3d 88, 97 (Tex. 2012) (“The court of appeals did not address the Hospital’s claim of immunity. … The offering party must establish that the witness has “knowledge, skill, experience, training, or education” pertaining to the specific issue before the court “which would qualify the expert to give an opinion on that particular

the City of Madisonville and the Madisonville Police Department v. David Sims

Texas Supreme Court · Apr 17, 2020

We held the Act clearly and unambiguously waives sovereign immunity, but that waiver is limited, and strict compliance with the Act’s procedural requirements is required to bring a claim. Id. at 513–14. … The Whistleblower Act, like the Texas Commission on Human Rights Act, clearly and unambiguously waives sovereign immunity to allow plaintiffs to obtain relief. See TEX.

San Antonio River Authority v. Austin Bridge & Road, L.P. and Hayward Baker, Inc.

Texas Supreme Court · May 1, 2020

Lodal & Bain Eng’rs, Inc., 602 S.W.2d 262, 263–64 (Tex. 1980) (holding local governmental entities “can exercise no authority that has not been clearly granted by the Legislature”); Tri-City Fresh Water Supply Dist. … —Fort Worth 2009, pet. denied) (holding that the agreement in that case did not “clearly and unmistakably” reflect the “parties’ intent to refer the issue of waiver by litigation conduct to the arbitrator” because “[t]he

State v. Shumake

49 Tex. Sup. Ct. J. 769 · Texas Supreme Court · Jun 23, 2006

The trial court further concluded that the Shumakes had established a waiver of immunity for their alternative claims of nuisance and attractive nuisance. . … The court of appeals concluded that the Shu-makes had not established the state’s waiver of immunity for claims of nuisance and attractive nuisance. 131 S.W.3d at 72-73.

Prairie View A&M University v. Diljit K. Chatha

55 Tex. Sup. Ct. J. 1267 · Texas Supreme Court · Aug 31, 2012

Although our precedent establishes that- the TCHRA clearly and unambiguously waives sovereign immunity, it is a limited waiver of immunity. See Mission Consol. Indep. Sch. Dist., 253 S.W.3d at 660 . … The potential absence of equitable defenses against governmental entities that retain their immunity is sovereign immunity’s most basic tenet.

The City of Dallas v. the Employees' Retirement Fund of the City of Dallas

Texas Supreme Court · Mar 15, 2024

A city’s “governing body” would develop such a plan, which “shall be submitted in ordinance form by said governing body to the qualified electors of such city” and “be approved by said qualified electors at an election duly … As we stated in a case involving another city, “[e]ven if a governmental unit would be happy to waive ‘its’ immunity, it is not the governmental unit’s immunity to waive.” Rattray v.

Citizens National Bank of Denton v. Cockrell

850 S.W.2d 462 · Texas Supreme Court · May 5, 1993

Because this undisputed evidence establishes the Sydnors' "possession" under section 9.312(d) as we conclude that section must be read, there is no evidence to support the jury finding that the Sydnors received possession … The statute which gives the FDIC standing to assert rights as a receiver clearly requires the FDIC to abide by a judgment that has become final before it is appointed as receiver. 12 U.S.C. § 1821 (d)(13)(A).

Big MacK Trucking Company, Inc. v. Dickerson

16 Tex. Sup. Ct. J. 404 · Texas Supreme Court · Jun 27, 1973

On the third point, the penalty imposed is the same for all violators, i. e., he loses the immunity from suit provided by Art. 8306, § 3. … That alone is clearly insufficient, and it is unaided by any mention by Officer Harwell that the declarant appeared to be distraught.

Austin & Northwestern Railroad v. Cluck

64 L.R.A. 494 · Texas Supreme Court · Dec 14, 1903

Whether, under this guaranty of immunity from inter *181 ference with the person, the Legislature might authorize the physical examination of a party to a suit, is not before us for determination, but we are of the opinion … In case of unreasonable refusal to allow examination, the court could and should set aside the verdict, unless the evidence satisfactorily established the right.

Lee v. Downey

842 S.W.2d 646 · Texas Supreme Court · Dec 16, 1992

Mandamus is available only when a trial court clearly abuses its discretion and there is no adequate remedy by appeal. Walker v. Packer, 827 S.W.2d 833, 839-43 (Tex.1992). … For the reasons explained in my prior opinion in this case, Relators did not meet their burden of showing that Judge Downey clearly abused his discretion nor did they establish why an ordinary appeal was inadequate. .

Kolster v. City of El Paso

972 S.W.2d 58 · Texas Supreme Court · Aug 25, 1998

Whatever the jury's answer to that question, the City contended that its immunity was established. … That holding was the basis for the court's determination that the City had established immunity as a *62 matter of law.

in the Interest of S.M.R., G.J.R. and C.N.R., Children

57 Tex. Sup. Ct. J. 670 · Texas Supreme Court · Jun 6, 2014

The aunt also had been unable to enroll the eldest daughter in school because her immunizations were not current. … Thus, we are not powerless to correct a clearly erroneous review of the evidence.

Texas Tech University Health Sciences Center-El Paso v. Loretta K. Flores

Texas Supreme Court · Nov 20, 2020

expressly waived that immunity. … In an age- discrimination case, the plaintiff establishes a prima facie case with evidence that she (1) was a member of the protected class (that is, 40 years of age or older), (2) was qualified for the position at issue

National Union Fire Insurance Co. of Pittsburgh v. Hudson Energy Co.

34 Tex. Sup. Ct. J. 717 · Texas Supreme Court · Jun 19, 1991

National Union argues that the policy clearly excludes coverage when an unqualified pilot is at the controls, even if a qualified pilot was simultaneously piloting the craft. … Neither the exclusion clause nor the declaration clause clearly exclude simultaneous piloting by a qualified pilot and an unqualified pilot.

McKinney v. National Union Fire Insurance Co. of Pittsburgh

32 Tex. Sup. Ct. J. 436 · Texas Supreme Court · Jun 7, 1989

Oftentimes, parties make overly broad or burdensome requests for information or seek clearly nondiscoverble matters. … If a hearing is held, the objecting party must assume the burden of establishing its privilege, immunity or other objection to the discovery request.

Texas & Mississippi River, Canal, & Navigation Co. v. County Court of Galveston County

45 Tex. 272 · Texas Supreme Court · Jul 1, 1876

To ascertain who were qualified voters, the registrar was required to make a special registration of the qualified voters — • *285 the registration to be conducted in accordance with the provisions of the act of July 11,1870 … The company could not have performed these acts nor have enjoyed the immunities and privileges secured by this act of June 2, by virtue of its articles of association in any capacity, whether as a corporation, a-joint stock

Lowe v. Texas Tech University

19 Tex. Sup. Ct. J. 398 · Texas Supreme Court · Jul 14, 1976

specific holding is not in point here, i. e., that allegations of negligence against the State agency in hiring incapable employees, in failing to maintain adequate supervision, and in failing to have a sufficient number of qualified … The purpose of this concurring opinion is to encourage the Legislature to take another look at the Tort Claims Act, and to express more clearly its intent as to when it directs that governmental immunity is waived.

FKM Partnership, Ltd. v. Board of Regents

51 Tex. Sup. Ct. J. 989 · Texas Supreme Court · Jun 6, 2008

The provision clearly contemplates that the condemnor negotiate with the property owner prior to filing suit. … In response, the University does not contend that section 21.019 is not a waiver of its immunity, but rather that it is immune from FKM’s claims because the claims do not fit within the terms of the statutory waiver. 1.

City of Beaumont v. Yvonne Como

55 Tex. Sup. Ct. J. 1422 · Texas Supreme Court · Aug 31, 2012

Como responded that she would not attend the hearing and that she disagreed that her building qualified as a dangerous structure under the applicable ordinances. … The City filed an immunity- based plea to the jurisdiction, which the trial court granted.