Case law

Friendswood Development Co. v. Smith-Southwest Industries, Inc.

22 Tex. Sup. Ct. J. 107 · Texas Supreme Court · Nov 29, 1978

Even though good reasons may exist for lifting the immunity from tort actions in cases of this nature, it would be unjust to do so retroactively. … As far as we can determine, there is no other use of private real property which enjoys such an immunity from liability under the law of negligence.

University of Texas Medical Branch v. York

871 S.W.2d 175 · Texas Supreme Court · Mar 30, 1994

"condition or use" waiving immunity. … Tex.Gov't.Code Ann. § 311.023. [4] Chief Justice Greenhill stated that he was writing his concurrence for the "purpose of encouraging the Legislature to take another look at the Tort Claims Act, and to express more clearly

Journeay v. Shook

105 Tex. 551 · Texas Supreme Court · Jan 22, 1913

“It is therefore ordered and decreed by the court, that said will is hereby proven and established as the last will and testament of said H. B. Salliway, deceased. … Clearly, one who may be removed for incapacity to perform the duties of the office should not be appointed.

Garza v. Garcia

47 Tex. Sup. Ct. J. 570 · Texas Supreme Court · May 14, 2004

Thus, the Legislature clearly considered proper venue to be of critical importance. … Requiring a trial court to state in its order, or otherwise include findings in the record, to establish that a granted motion to transfer venue is based on the convenience of the parties when the defendant has also sought

Texas Home Management, Inc. v. Peavy

46 Tex. Sup. Ct. J. 71 · Texas Supreme Court · Oct 31, 2002

The state authorities, including MHMR, are, of course, immune from liability to third parties for making these judgment calls because of the doctrine of sovereign immunity and the fact that the Texas Tort Claims Act does … The summary judgment record establishes that Lakewood House had no security gates or locked doors.

State v. Cook

78 Tex. 406 · Texas Supreme Court · Nov 11, 1890

In disposing of the case it was said: “New counties can not be established without the election and qualification of justices of the peace and other county officers, and as these new counties are to be established when the … Counsel for appellant seeks to establish the proposition that the word “establish” used in the Constitution of 1869 does not mean the same as the word “create” found in section 1, article 9, of the present Constitution, but

Texas Pipe Line Co. v. Hunt

149 Tex. 33 · Texas Supreme Court · Mar 8, 1950

at Law, established by statute for some of the more populous counties of the state. … There was in a sense no verdict at all, because one finding was as good or bad as the other, yet because of the clearly erroneous ratio between them, both could not stand.

Houston Municipal Employees Pension System v. Ferrell

51 Tex. Sup. Ct. J. 154 · Texas Supreme Court · Nov 30, 2007

However, HMEPS no longer asserts immunity with respect to the 29 plaintiffs. … rather than governmental immunity.

City of Fort Worth v. Davis

57 Tex. 225 · Texas Supreme Court · Jun 6, 1882

be said to be clearly unconstitutional and void. … But the constitution prescribes no means of ascertaining the number of tax-paying qualified voters in the city.

Bounds v. Caudle

21 Tex. Sup. Ct. J. 92 · Texas Supreme Court · Nov 30, 1977

We concur and accordingly we abolish the rule established in Nickerson to the extent that it would bar all claims for wilful or intentional torts. … This evidence, although refuted and rebutted by circumstantial evidence, clearly is some evidence that Mrs. Bounds was shot during the scuffle which ensued when Dr.

Marcus Everette Harper v. Texas Department of Criminal Justice

Texas Supreme Court · Jan 23, 2015

Adams, 22l F.3d.1254,1258 (llth Cir.200). to overcome qualified immunity (l) your rights were violated: (2) the right that was violated was clearly established; and (3) the defendant was personally responsible for the violation … This discovery rule prevented him from hiring an expert report., but however there is a doctor physician repdg that clearly states med- ical staff failed to follow wedical instruction that cause my in- fection. the existence

Wallace L. Hall, Jr., in His Official Capacity as a Regent for the University of Texas System v. William H. McRaven, in His Official Capacity as Chancellor for the University of Texas System

Texas Supreme Court · Jan 27, 2017

fulfill his duties as a regent”); see also ante at ___ (W ILLETT , J., concurring) (citing the Attorney General’s decision with approval). 5 or need it be established … City of Houston, 487 S.W .3d 154, 160 (Tex. 2016) (observing sovereign and governmental immunity implicate subject-matter jurisdiction) (citing Rusk State Hosp. v. Black, 392 S.W .3d 88, 91 (Tex. 2012)); Greene v.

McFadden v. Longham

58 Tex. 579 · Texas Supreme Court · Feb 26, 1883

It is this: “By the law of the land is most clearly intended the general law which hears before it condemns; which proceeds upon inquiry, and renders judgment only after trial. … The meaning is, that every citizen shall hold his life, liberty, property and immunities under the protection of general rules which govern society.

Texas Power & Light Company v. City of Garland

11 Tex. Sup. Ct. J. 303 · Texas Supreme Court · Mar 27, 1968

The question, therefore, is whether the provisions of the 1949 ordinance invoked by the City qualify as an exercise of the police power directly promoting legiti *518 mate concerns of the government. … It is significant that the City granted a franchise which clearly and unambiguously declared a purpose repugnant to the idea of implied incorporation.

In RE ALLSTATE INDEMNITY COMPANY v. the State of Texas

Texas Supreme Court · May 7, 2021

This statutory text tracks the portion of Texas Rule of Evidence 702 that establishes who may be qualified to provide expert opinion testimony. See TEX. R. … Dickison’s counteraffidavit establishes that she is qualified to controvert the reasonableness of the charges at issue, and the counteraffidavit satisfies section 18.001(f)’s reasonable-notice requirement.

North Alamo Water Supply Corp. v. Willacy County Appraisal District

804 S.W.2d 894 · Texas Supreme Court · Apr 3, 1991

The supply of water to the public, they argue, is clearly a duty which would fall to the government if the corporations did not provide their services. … Accordingly, the burden of proof of clearly showing that the organization falls within the statutory exemption is on the claimant. Bullock, 584 S.W.2d at 272 .

Mayor of Houston v. Houston City Street Railway Co.

83 Tex. 548 · Texas Supreme Court · Mar 1, 1892

to us) passed an additional ordinance, which gave its permission to the plaintiff “to build and operate its street railway” upon a number of the streets of the city, including the right upon the part of the plaintiff to establish … To control and regulate everything concerning street railways,” etc. *555 We are of the opinion that by the terms of both of these charters (clearly by that of the street railway company) the Legislature intended to and did

Millhouse v. Wiesenthal

32 Tex. Sup. Ct. J. 332 · Texas Supreme Court · Apr 19, 1989

Wiesenthal filed a motion for summary judgment, claiming that Millhouse failed to establish causation. … A judge is clearly in a better position to make this determination.

The Board of Regents of the University of Texas System v. Idexx Laboratories, Inc.

Texas Supreme Court · Jun 14, 2024

In other words, if after applying established rules of interpretation to the contract it remains reasonably susceptible to more 14 Universal C. I. T. Credit Corp. v. … A defendant with any one of the three doesn’t qualify, making the qualifying criteria for the safety valve very stringent.

Honey v. Graham

39 Tex. 1 · Texas Supreme Court · Jul 1, 1873

the superior holding his high position and privileges above and independent of the people, and responsible alone to his superiors, while the king and nobles are considered the source and fountain of all power, rights and immunities … the Constitution, ‘: may sign the name of the Treasurer, whenever, by reason of sickness, unavoidable ab-v-sence, or other .cause, the Treasurer’s name may not be *26 affixed by himself” (Paschal’s Digest, Article 5291), clearly