Case law

Lone Star Lodge, Knights & Ladies of Honor v. Cole

62 Tex. Civ. App. 500 · Court of Appeals of Texas · Oct 29, 1910

Both as the duly elected and qualified agent and officer authorized to accept and receipt for said payments; that defendants, and each of them, be restrained and enjoined from in any manner asserting, contending or claiming … W., *512 553), and other Texas cases cited by appellant, in that in those cases it clearly appeared, and was so held by the court, that property rights of the aggrieved party were involved.

Zeppa v. Houston Oil Co. of Texas

113 S.W.2d 612 · Court of Appeals of Texas · Feb 11, 1938

The words just quoted clearly evidence an intention to convey 100 acres — a limited quantity of land— out of a larger tract. … And we would then have left an incomplete description of' the land leased — its so established west line only.

Mandril v. Kasishke

620 S.W.2d 238 · Court of Appeals of Texas · Jul 31, 1981

Mandril was not qualified to prepare it. Nevertheless, the record shows that Mr. Mandril has over 30 years of bookkeeping experience. … Clearly, the amount of overcharges, if any, was an ultimate issue in the case. In her brief, under this cross-point, Mrs.

Gatesco Q.M. Ltd. v. City of Houston

503 S.W.3d 607 · Court of Appeals of Texas · Oct 20, 2016

In a traditional motion for summary judgment, if the movant’s motion and *613 summary-judgment evidence facially establish its right to judgment as a matter of law, the burden shifts to the nonmovant to raise a genuine, material … To state a no-evidence ground, the mov-ant must assert clearly that there is no evidence of one or more essential elements of a claim or defense on which the adverse party would have the burden of proof at trial.

Downs v. State

244 S.W.3d 511 · Court of Appeals of Texas · Dec 6, 2007

(holding that testimony by defendant clearly indicated he had acted out of a perceived necessity and therefore it was unacceptable trial tactic to fail to request an instruction on necessity). … The challenger has the burden of establishing unconstitutionality. Wilson v. State, 44 S.W.3d 602, 604 (Tex.App.-Fort Worth 2001, pet. ref'd).

Miller v. Laughlin

147 S.W. 711 · Court of Appeals of Texas · Apr 18, 1912

The court qualified the bill of exception by showing that the evidence of Laughlin as to the conversations with Wall was admitted to show whether the transaction was with Wall individually, or with Wall & Co., and the court … partner which go to show the partnership’s liability for the debt are admissible and should go to the jury, with the instruction that they are to be disregarded provided they should find that the fact of partnership is not established

Golden Villa Nursing Home, Inc. v. Smith

674 S.W.2d 343 · Court of Appeals of Texas · Apr 5, 1984

However, an exception to the rule that expert testimony is necessary was clearly recognized in Harle v. … However, she qualified her answer by first stating, “Well, I really don’t know, I’m not a doctor.”

Alley v. Ponca Wholesale Mercantile Company

360 S.W.2d 870 · Court of Appeals of Texas · Sep 17, 1962

This fact was clearly brought to the attention of the court at the hearing when objection was made to the introduction into evidence of the surety bond. … Thus the controverting affidavit itself must set out specifically the fact or facts relied on by the plaintiff to establish venue in the county where the case is pending.

Pythian Home for Orphans at Weatherford v. Barrow

346 S.W.2d 426 · Court of Appeals of Texas · Apr 24, 1961

The will here under construction is no exception to that rule so we must adhere to the general rules of construction heretofore well established by adjudicated cases unless it clearly appears that a different meaning was … One of the notes referred to in the Am.Jur. citation also says: “Some jurisdictions seem to have reached the conclusion that a devise with limitation over in case of the devisee’s marriage, gives a determinable or qualified

Duncan v. Cessna Aircraft Co.

632 S.W.2d 375 · Court of Appeals of Texas · Apr 22, 1982

New Mexico law allows interspousal suits based on negligence while Texas retains interspousal tort immunity for negligence. … The court acknowledged that a § 402A cause of action existed against the manufacturer of the grain, notwithstanding the fact that consumption of the treated feed by animals was clearly an unintended use of the product.

Texas Employers Ins. Ass'n v. Griffis

141 S.W.2d 687 · Court of Appeals of Texas · May 30, 1940

in the future, that only a doctor is qualified to give. … recovered, which letter concluded: “There is no deformity and neither will there be any permanent injury resulting”; and also the evidence of appellee’s neighbors, and members of his family, and fellow-workmen, which tended to establish

Reynolds v. State

822 S.W.2d 341 · Court of Appeals of Texas · Jan 9, 1992

Alva Barbosa, technical supervisor with the Texas DPS, established that the surge protector was not part of the intoxilizer instrument, nor was it a certifiable part, and that the Scientific Director makes the determinations … Clearly the instant indictment falls short of this requirement. It must next be determined, however, whether this particular defect of notice harmed the defendant.

Krausse v. Barton

430 S.W.2d 44 · Court of Appeals of Texas · Jun 6, 1968

At the time of the trial she was the duly qualified and acting independent executor of the will of Nellie H. … In various sub-sections the testator clearly includes the appointive estate within the meaning of the term “my estate”.

Child World v. Solito

780 S.W.2d 954 · Court of Appeals of Texas · Dec 7, 1989

At the hearing on the motion, relators argued the documents were privileged under Tex.R.Civ.P. 166b(3)(d) because they qualified as party communications made in anticipation of litigation. … From the circumstances surrounding its preparation, the report was clearly prepared not only in anticipation of, but in preparation for, litigation.

In re State

564 S.W.3d 58 · Court of Appeals of Texas · Jul 18, 2018

Therefore, mandamus relief is appropriate if the State establishes it has a clear right to the relief sought. Clear Right to Relief Sought 1. … Consequently, the trial court clearly abused its discretion by excluding the evidence as irrelevant.

Gunn v. Aetna Life & Casualty Co.

629 S.W.2d 59 · Court of Appeals of Texas · Jun 29, 1981

The trial court granted the insurer’s motion on the ground that the deceased employee had not qualified for coverage on the date of her death. … A contract is ambiguous when, after applying established rules of interpretation, it remains reasonably susceptible to more than one meaning. Universal C. I. T. Credit Corporation v.

Hamilton v. Pechacek

319 S.W.3d 801 · Court of Appeals of Texas · Mar 11, 2010

But Congress did not intend section 1983 to abrogate a state’s sovereign immunity from suit without the state’s consent. Will v. Mich. … On appeal, Hamilton specifically argues that Pecha-cek’s actions were in bad faith and “not sanctioned by any established state policy,” as demonstrated by the fact that they allegedly violated established TDCJ rules, policies

Goodrich v. Tinker

437 S.W.2d 882 · Court of Appeals of Texas · Feb 12, 1969

Appellant relies upon the established rule of law that a doctor who is not a treating doctor and who examines the patient for the purpose of making a report or testifying if necessary in court cannot base his opinion testimony … Under such circumstances his statements become clearly self-serving and hearsay, and should not be admitted.’ ” And the Gibson case further quotes from Texas Employers Ins. Ass’n v.

Hunt Developers, Inc. v. Western Steel Company

409 S.W.2d 443 · Court of Appeals of Texas · Nov 17, 1966

This imposes a duty upon the owner to withhold ten percent of the contract price for the benefit of those who would qualify under this statute. … Article 5469 V.A.C.S. clearly states that the owner is to retain ten percent of the contract price. This does not refer to a particular contract, a subcontract or anything less than the contract price of the building.

Rumph v. State

687 S.W.2d 489 · Court of Appeals of Texas · Feb 28, 1985

Appellant contends that the medical examiner’s statement is a legal conclusion which he was not qualified to testify to. The statement was a factual conclusion, not a legal conclusion. … The role of the appellate court in reviewing the sufficiency of the evidence is not to ask whether we believe that the evidence at trial established guilt beyond a reasonable doubt; it is whether, after viewing the evidence