Case law

Angela Horton and Kevin Houser v. the Kansas City Southern Railway Company

Texas Supreme Court · Jun 28, 2024

At stake is not just a question of retroactive liability or sovereign immunity, but basic questions about self-government, equality, fair notice, federalism, and the separation of powers. … question on which Congress must speak clearly if it wishes to displace core state power.

Ball, Hutchings & Co. v. Lowell

56 Tex. 579 · Texas Supreme Court · Mar 24, 1882

. *592 In the first place I remark that the allowance, if made, defeats an express lien, clearly valid when given. Unless such be the clearly expressed legislative will, this should not be done. … This is true; but this might happen if the homestead were the property of the last community, and the surviving wife saw fit to qualify as survivor, and to sell the homestead.

Harris County Flood Control District and Harris County, Texas v. Edward A. and Norma Kerr

Texas Supreme Court · Jun 15, 2015

The Seventh Circuit has similarly characterized the burden of establishing a public use as “remarkably light.” Daniels v. … The Legislature has clearly exercised its prerogative to protect the property rights of Texans by narrowly defining public use.

City of Waco v. Kirwan

53 Tex. Sup. Ct. J. 140 · Texas Supreme Court · Nov 20, 2009

Attached to his affidavit were photographs of the cliff, which clearly demonstrate that the cliff is a natural condition altered only by nature. … of governmental immunity.

Texas Department of Criminal Justice v. Cesar Rangel

Texas Supreme Court · Feb 7, 2020

As a result, Department policy required that all skat shells be labeled clearly to warn employees to use those shells only outdoors. … The Department disagrees with both of Rangel’s arguments, contending that the undisputed jurisdictional facts establish a riot as a matter of law.

Sherman Simon Enterprises, Inc. v. Lorac Service Corp.

30 Tex. Sup. Ct. J. 153 · Texas Supreme Court · Jan 21, 1987

We have recognized at least two requirements that must be established for a person to qualify as a consumer under the DTPA. In Cameron v. … Terrell & Garrett, Inc., 618 S.W.2d 535, 538 (Tex.1981), we reaffirmed the requirement that a person must qualify as a consumer as that term is defined in Tex.Bus. & Com.

International & Great Northern Railway Co v. Anderson County

106 Tex. 60 · Texas Supreme Court · May 7, 1913

They are clearly not to be classed or regarded as merely of a private character. … It qualified their use and enjoyment by an abridgment of the important right of location, which otherwise the company would have possessed as an incident of ownership, and impressed their use with an obligation to maintain

Western Mortgage & Investment Co. v. Jackman

77 Tex. 622 · Texas Supreme Court · Jun 13, 1890

Jackman was appointed and qualified as administrator of his estate. … This clearly distinguishes the claim from the mortgage by which it is secured, and indicates that the claim only need be allowed and approved or established by suit.

Texas Banking & Insurance v. Stone

49 Tex. 4 · Texas Supreme Court · Jul 1, 1878

But while it may be shown by parol evidence that the insurer is estopped from claiming immunity from liability by reason of a breach in the warranty thus improperly or inaccurately incorporated in the policy, yet there must … Aside from this evidence, it was clearly irrelevant, and calculated to mislead the jury, and therefore erroneous. The judgment is reversed and the cause remanded. Reversed and remanded.

Harris v. Schlinke

95 Tex. 88 · Texas Supreme Court · Nov 25, 1901

Caldwell, 71 Texas, 19 , establish an exception as to sureties upon bonds given to secure ordinary process. In Coates v. … We think this practice was clearly contemplated by the laws existing at the time the Revised Statutes were adopted. Pasch. Dig., art. 3936.

Maryland Casualty Co. v. Hudgins

97 Tex. 124 · Texas Supreme Court · Nov 16, 1903

The evidence established the allegations of the petition as to the manner of Hudgins’ death, but the facts need not be repeated. … The last clause quoted was introduced to qualify the excepting clause; the words “choking in swallowing” can refer to no word in the qualified clause except “taken,” and serves to define the meaning of that word.

Robbins v. Limestone County

114 Tex. 345 · Texas Supreme Court · Jan 28, 1925

This is clearly reflected in the Constitution and early decisions of this Court. … This is clearly held in Travis County v. Trogdon, 88 Texas, 302 , 31 S. W., 358 .

Moore v. Grantham

599 S.W.2d 287 · Texas Supreme Court · May 14, 1980

He is qualified as an expert in vocational rehabilitation. Despite his qualifications in the field of vocational rehabilitation, Dr. … Clearly, his opinion testimony concerning Ms.

Alan Schrock v. City of Baytown

Texas Supreme Court · Dec 10, 2015

City of Glenn Heights, 140 S.W.3d 660, 677 (Tex. 2004) (“The City argues that evidence of lost profits should be ignored, but we agree with the court of appeals that lost profits are clearly one relevant factor to consider … because he presented a valid claim and, thus, the City’s governmental immunity is waived.

Hughes v. Mulanax

105 Tex. 576 · Texas Supreme Court · Feb 12, 1913

The order merely established the will and adjudged that Holmes be authorized to qualify ‘according to law and the provisions of said will as executor,’ and that he enter into bond as provided in the will and return inventory … McDavid qualified and returned an inventory in due time.

Wenar v. Stenzel

48 Tex. 484 · Texas Supreme Court · Jul 1, 1878

It was clearly not the intention of the Legislature to throw restrictions around the survivors in such cases, but to enlarge their powers.” (Dawson v. Holt, supra. See, also, Lumpkin v. … They are further told, that if the evidence established that the lot sued for was the community property of J. C.

Trigg v. State

49 Tex. 645 · Texas Supreme Court · Jul 1, 1878

If these four instances of drunkenness during the year were alleged as being sufficient to establish the fact contained-in the charge of habitual drunkenness, it would have been error to have sustained the charge so qualified … Also, the clause in the bill of rights, that “No citizen of this State shall be deprived of life, liberty, property, privileges, or immunities, or in any manner disfranchised, except by due course of the law of the land.”

Eberhard Samlowski, M.D. v. Carol Wooten

Texas Supreme Court · Feb 25, 2011

P. 329b (establishing timeline for filing certain motions); Tex. R. App. … The Legislature clearly contemplated that trial courts would grant extensions when reports contained varying degrees of deficiencies. See Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem.

Anthony, John Dennis Clayton

Texas Supreme Court · Jul 9, 2015

Clearly, this request was broad enough to require the inclusion of one granted Motion. … Appellant respectfully contends that neither Trial Counsel nor the Honorable Judge from Bailey County is qualified as such an expert.

Jernigan v. Langley

46 Tex. Sup. Ct. J. 1010 · Texas Supreme Court · Jul 3, 2003

Jernigan filed a motion for summary judgment based on the Charitable Immunity and Liability Act of 1987. See Tex. Civ. Piiac. & Rem.Code eh. 84. No hearing was held on the motion. On June 23, 2000, Dr. … Waiver is largely a matter of intent, and for implied waiver to be found through a party’s actions, intent must be clearly demonstrated by the surrounding facts and circumstances. Motor Vehicle Bd. v. El Paso Indep.