Case law

Williams v. Davidson

43 Tex. 1 · Texas Supreme Court · Jul 1, 1875

But then the usage itself has been qualified by continually getting the aid to the claim of the County Court in fixing the rates of toll, which is itself inconsistent with the claim' of absolute right to the franchise. … Under the issue, it was incumbent on the plaintiffs to prove *40 such facts as would establish the bridge to be in and part of the public highway at the time the suit was brought; such affirmative facts as would establish

McCord v. W.A. Nabours

101 Tex. 494 · Texas Supreme Court · Apr 22, 1908

McCord assignees, who *Page 499 qualified according to law and took charge of the property. … We think that this question is clearly settled by the following decisions of this court: Boothe v. Fiest, 80 Tex. 141 ; Mixon v. Miles, 92 Tex. 318 [ 92 Tex. 318 ].

Gulf, Colorado & Santa Fe Railway Co. v. Harriett

80 Tex. 73 · Texas Supreme Court · Feb 27, 1891

The law bearing upon this issue is very clearly stated in Chitty on Contracts: “Upon the whole the true distinction would seem to be between the cases in which the plaintiff has agreed to accept the promise of the defendant … McCamley qualified himself sufficiently 'as an expert to testify to the reasonableness of the charges. - There was no error in admitting over defendant’s objection the testimony of Dr. Sykes.

San Antonio Real Estate Building & Loan Ass'n v. Stewart

94 Tex. 441 · Texas Supreme Court · Mar 21, 1901

We have given the question a careful re-examination and", as a result, are unable to say either that it did not receive proper attention in the cases previously' before this court or that the decisions are so clearly wrong … When the proposition is established that the failure to pay an installment ipso facto gives rise to the cause of action upon the whole debt, it necessarily follows that mere delay in suing, or acceptance of part of what is

Waples v. Marrast

108 Tex. 5 · Texas Supreme Court · Mar 22, 1916

as many as 50,000 votes for their respective candidates for Governor at the last preceding general election,—obedience to it being optional with parties SO' polling a less *8 number of votes,—for the expression by their qualified … If it is not the business of the State to see that such nominations are made, as it clearly is not, the public revenues can not be employed in that connection.

TRINITY RIVER AUTHORITY OF TEXAS v. Carr

8 Tex. Sup. Ct. J. 178 · Texas Supreme Court · Jan 20, 1965

The contract was authorized on behalf of the City by the qualified electors thereof by an affirmative vote of 49,-114 to a negative vote of 11,256, and on behalf of the Authority by a resolution of its Board of Directors. … The letter clearly discloses that respondent has not declined to approve the bonds because he believes they are invalid for any of the reasons stated in the nine objections.

Lively v. Missouri, Kansas & Texas Railway Co.

102 Tex. 545 · Texas Supreme Court · Jun 25, 1909

This is a clearly expressed purpose, that the officers charged with the assessment of property shall in the manner prescribed by law ascertain its value. … Section T of the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States provides as follows: “Ho State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States

Gorman v. Life Insurance Co. of North America

34 Tex. Sup. Ct. J. 457 · Texas Supreme Court · Mar 27, 1991

This finding established that LINA breached the contract of insurance that it had entered into with Gorman. … The evidence establishes that he left the seminar at noon and attended a meeting at Tenneco at 2:00 p.m.

Ford v. Panhandle & Santa Fe Railway Co.

151 Tex. 538 · Texas Supreme Court · Oct 1, 1952

Our courts have repeatedly held that the discovery of a person’s peril in time is one of the essential elements in the establishment of liability under the doctrine of discovered peril. … The facts of this case clearly show that it does not fall within the scope of the doctrine of discovered peril.

Southern Surety Co. v. Hidalgo County

125 Tex. 390 · Texas Supreme Court · Jun 12, 1935

He is required to take the usual official oath of office, and also an additional oath, in writing, stating he is in every way qualified under the provisions and requirements of the law relating to his office, the positions … Clearly Liles’ transaction with the depository bank was had by virtue of his office, and in view of his subsequent acts, constituted official malfeasance. In Holliman v.

Noa Spears and Wife v. City of San Antonio

110 Tex. 618 · Texas Supreme Court · Jun 23, 1920

Dillon says: ‘It is well established that a provision in a municipal charter that it shall not take effect unless assented to or accepted by a majority of the inhabitants is in no just sense a delegation of legislative power … act under consideration merely leaves each town or city in the State to determine by a vote whether it will exercise the power of controlling its public schools as a separate school district or not, and is in our opinion clearly

State v. Delesdenier

7 Tex. 76 · Texas Supreme Court · Jul 1, 1851

The General Land Office was established by the act of December 22, 1836. (Hart. Dig., art. 17S2.) … This is tlie object of the act, as declared by its title and clearly indicated in its details.

in Re Michael N. Blair

56 Tex. Sup. Ct. J. 906 · Texas Supreme Court · Aug 23, 2013

To qualify for compensation, a claimant “must” file an application with the Comptroller “not later than the third anniversary of the date” the claimant received a pardon or was granted habeas corpus relief on the basis … GOV ’T CODE § 311.034 (“In order to preserve the legislature’s interest in managing state fiscal matters through the appropriations process, a statute shall not be construed as a waiver of sovereign immunity unless the

McMullen v. Hodge

5 Tex. 34 · Texas Supreme Court · Dec 15, 1849

Old habits and customs must prevail until new ones have been established. … The term “revolution,” when used in reference to governments, has a positive and a qualified meaning: when employed in the first it supposes a radical change of the whole system and structure of the government; when in the

Texas & Pacific Railway Co. v. Durrett

1 Tex. L. R. 226 · Texas Supreme Court · Jun 15, 1882

The record exhibits proof amply sufficient to establish that the property was owned by Mrs. Durrett in her own separate right. The appellants, after they had laid off their road across the land claimed by Mrs. … The evidence was conflicting, but there was evidence amply sufficient to sustain the verdict; at least it is not so clearly excessive as to authorize this court to set it aside.

in Re Commitment of Jeffery Lee Stoddard

Texas Supreme Court · Dec 18, 2020

Viewing Stoddard’s criminal history “in light of the weak evidence of other factors considered by Proctor,” the court concluded that “it is simply not enough to qualify Stoddard as the type of sex offender whom these civil … significant. 18 The court thereby effectively opined that civil commitment under the SVP Act is reserved for the “worst of the worst” and that Stoddard does not qualify

Ken Paxton, in His Official Capacity as Attorney General of Texas, and Greg Abbott, in His Official Capacity as Governor of Texas v. American Oversight

Texas Supreme Court · Jun 27, 2025

Take how Article V, § 3(a) of the Constitution immunizes only the governor, and not the other executive officials, from becoming targets of this Court’s writs of mandamus. … Charged with causing the laws to be faithfully executed, the governor’s role underscores his immunity from our mandamus authority. I explore all this, and more, below.

Missouri, Kansas & Texas Railway Co. v. Shannon

100 Tex. 379 · Texas Supreme Court · Mar 1, 1907

The present case is clearly distinguishable from that of Stephens v. Texas & Pacific Railway Co. ( 100 Texas, 177 ). … hold his office for two years and until his successor is elected and qualified.”

S.V. v. R.V.

933 S.W.2d 1 · Texas Supreme Court · Mar 14, 1996

By contrast, the dissent argues that the testimony of a “qualified, reputable mental health expert[ ] should suffice” as verification. 933 S.W.2d at 38 (Owen, J., dissenting). … There are some types of expert testimony to which the nonexclusive factors adopted in Robinson are clearly inapplicable.

In Re Barr

13 S.W.3d 525 · Texas Supreme Court · Mar 1, 1999

His conduct nonetheless clearly amounted to legal error. … We clearly, absolutely, unequivocally, and unanimously condemn the use of self-help or other personal intervention on the part of a judge in an effort to enforce a judicial order when established judicial remedies are available