Case law

Texas Employers Ins. Ass'n v. Hatton

152 Tex. 199 · Texas Supreme Court · Feb 11, 1953

While these cases deal with the right of an examination in the presence of the jury, nonetheless we think the holdings clearly encompass the right of the demonstration sought to be performed here. … It is well established in the jurisprudence of this state that in the absence of a statutory requirement to the contrary, an injured litigant cannot be compelled to submit himself or his injured parts to an examination by

Texas Tech University System and Texas Tech University System Board of Regents v. Pureza "Didit" Martinez

Texas Supreme Court · Jun 14, 2024

She has done so—and the Education Code provisions conclusively establish it as a matter of law, too. … Such immunity “is an affirmative defense that cannot be raised by a plea to the jurisdiction.” State v. Lueck, 290 S.W.3d 876, 880 (Tex. 2009) (emphasis added).

Southern Surety Co. v. Nelson

111 Tex. 140 · Texas Supreme Court · Apr 13, 1921

Otherwise, we would be enforcing a penal statute, when it did not clearly apply, or enforcing it against one not manifestly within its terms, in violation of the established rules of construction of penal statutes. … The right was not qualified by imposing a penalty upon a party in the event of a determination adversely to him.

Permian Oil Co. v. Smith

107 S.W.2d 564 · Texas Supreme Court · Apr 7, 1937

Judge CRITZ certified his disqualification, resulting in the appointment of ELWOOD FOUTS, of Houston, Tex., as Special Associate Justice, who duly qualified. … Fundamentally its purpose is to expedite justice by putting an end to litigation; and to preserve the sanctity of the judgments of the courts by making them immune from collateral attack.

Wingfoot Enterprises v. Alvarado

46 Tex. Sup. Ct. J. 959 · Texas Supreme Court · Jul 3, 2003

leasing service company will cover employees leased to a client company, and that both the leasing company and the client may rely on the exclusive remedy provision of the Workers’ Compensation Act. 35 *141 Tandem does not qualify … If either has elected not to provide coverage, but still qualifies as an “employer” under the Act, then that employer should be subject to common law liability without the benefit of the defenses enumerated in section 406.033

In Re Estate of George W. Grant

93 Tex. 68 · Texas Supreme Court · Nov 6, 1899

The administrator so appointed qualified March 11, 1899. S. … The right to administer an estate independent of the court is clearly one that is different from those conferred upon executors generally.

Texas Department of Mental Health & Mental Retardation v. Petty

36 Tex. Sup. Ct. J. 421 · Texas Supreme Court · Dec 31, 1992

Unfortunately, the Tort Claims Act does not establish clear lines between immunized and nonimmun-ized conduct. As we have repeatedly and with some exasperation noted, it is also ambiguous. … On the other hand, the judge must consider the harm of compounding error by reflexively applying a clearly erroneous decision, particularly one which interprets a legislative enactment so far-reaching as the Texas Tort Claims

Ashish Patel, Anverali Satani, Nazira Momin, Minaz Chamadia, and Vijay Lakshmi Yogi v. Texas Department of Licensing and Regulation

Texas Supreme Court · Jun 29, 2015

For purposes of Parker, a nonsovereign actor is one whose conduct does not automatically qualify as that of the sovereign State itself.”) … STAT. § 326B.42 (West 2015) (defining “backflow prevention tester” as an individual qualified by training prescribed by the Plumbing Board); MINN.

National Western Life Insurance Company v. Acreman

11 Tex. Sup. Ct. J. 292 · Texas Supreme Court · Mar 20, 1968

The quoted provisions very clearly set aside a sum of money to be paid to Fuller personally upon satisfactory completion of the road. … The fund was expressly made immune to claims of third persons, and there is no mention in the agreement that National Western consented to the fixing of a lien on the mortgaged property.

Cameron v. Terrell & Garrett, Inc.

24 Tex. Sup. Ct. J. 265 · Texas Supreme Court · Mar 4, 1981

We have also recognized at least two requirements that must be established for a person to qualify as a consumer under the DTPA. … It contends that a person must seek or acquire goods or services furnished by the person he is suing to qualify as a consumer under the DTPA.

Stockton v. Montgomerty

1 Dallam 473 · Texas Supreme Court · Jan 15, 1842

Opening the Constitution and grouping the sections concerning counties and the representatives and functionaries of counties, we may more clearly discern how they harmonize, what they establish, what they forbid. … “The clerks of the district courts shall be elected by the qualified voters for members of Congress in the county where the courts are established.” Id., art. 4, sec. 6.

Robertson v. Work, Dist. Judge

114 Tex. 461 · Texas Supreme Court · Apr 15, 1925

the service to obtained would not support a judgment by default or any other character of judgment entered upon such service for that both of said deféndants were served with citation at a time when they were •exempt and immune … L., page 305, paragraph 243, as follows: “On the principle that mandamus will lie to compel a particular action by an inferior tribunal or officer, when the law clearly establishes the petitioner’s right to such action, it

Jack Pidgeon and Larry Hicks v. Mayor Sylvester Turner and City of Houston

538 S.W.3d 73 · Texas Supreme Court · Jun 30, 2017

Immunity Finally, we address the Mayor’s and the City’s interlocutory appeals from the trial court’s orders denying their pleas to the jurisdiction based on governmental immunity. … The City argued in its plea that the trial court must dismiss Pidgeon’s claims against it because Pidgeon failed to plead or establish any waiver of the City’s immunity.

Allen Chadwick Burbage v. W. Kirk Burbage and Burbage Funeral Home

57 Tex. Sup. Ct. J. 1303 · Texas Supreme Court · Aug 29, 2014

Importantly, the “purpose of Rule 274 is to afford trial courts an opportunity to correct errors in the charge by requiring objections both to clearly designate the error and to explain the grounds for complaint.” … Our legal-sufficiency review standards are well established.

Pierce v. Gibson

108 Tex. 62 · Texas Supreme Court · Apr 5, 1916

By the findings of the jury in answer to special issues the following facts were established: That C. I. … It was clearly not' the intention of the Legislature to throw restrictions around the survivor in such cases, but to enlarge their powers.” Again this court, speaking through Mr.

State Ex Rel. Merriam v. Ball

116 Tex. 527 · Texas Supreme Court · Jun 4, 1927

The court must find in favor of the petitioners for the establishment of the district “according to the boundaries as set forth in said petition.” … The Madera case is therefore clearly not in point. But if so, still we are compelled, upon both reason and authority, to follow the decision of the Supreme Court of the United States in Browning v. Hooper, cited above.

Energy Service Company of Bowie, Inc. v. Superior Snubbing Services, Inc.

Texas Supreme Court · Aug 24, 2007

It does not offend established contract presumptions. See MCI Telecomms . Corp. v. Tex. Utils . Elec. … exchange for employer immunity from claims.

Hart v. Rust

46 Tex. 556 · Texas Supreme Court · Jul 1, 1877

If, therefore, the deed from Horton to his son should be regarded as fraudulent in law, for want of a valuable consideration, or, if it was admitted to be fraudulent in fact, though such an assumption is clearly repelled … survives, and maybe exercised by the party "who qualifies and acts.

In Re McAllen Medical Center, Inc.

51 Tex. Sup. Ct. J. 1302 · Texas Supreme Court · Aug 29, 2008

On this record, the plaintiffs have not established Dr. Brown’s qualifications. … Brown is qualified to address this standard.

in Re Commitment of Michael Bohannan

55 Tex. Sup. Ct. J. 1337 · Texas Supreme Court · Aug 31, 2012

The definition might more clearly be written: “Behavioral abnormality” means a congenital or acquired predisposition, due to one’s emotional or volitional capacity, to commit a sexually violent offense, … Thus, Qualifier B simply explains or restates Qualifier A.