Case law

Cox v. Oliver

43 Tex. Civ. App. 110 · Court of Appeals of Texas · May 3, 1906

It does not clearly appear what has become of tli ese notes, nor of the other two of the four notes given. … He should not have established himself in the house against her wishes, but she testifies herself that neither A. G. Cox nor O. S.

Levy v. Rivaux

84 S.W.2d 847 · Court of Appeals of Texas · Jul 10, 1935

Wilson was elected and qualified as commissioner of streets and public property; and George Rivaux was elected and qualified as police and fire commissioner. … That he has no such right is established by the decision of this court upon the precise question in Perrett v, Wegner, 139 S. W. 984, 988 .

In re Elliott

504 S.W.3d 455 · Court of Appeals of Texas · Oct 7, 2016

May 20, 2016) (per curiam) (holding that "trial court clearly abused its discretion by ordering Rule 202 depositions" to "investigate ■ unripe claims” given that a lawsuit asserting such claims, if filed, would have been … Code § 27.011(a) (“This chapter [the TCPA] does not abrogate or lessen any other defense, remedy, immunity, or privilege available under other constitutional, statutory, case, or common law or rule provisions.”).

Bavarian Autohaus, Inc. v. Holland

570 S.W.2d 110 · Court of Appeals of Texas · Jul 20, 1978

When the owner of goods seeks to testify to their value, as distinguished from their value to him, the Texas rule is that he must show that he is qualified to do so; he is prima facie qualified to state it if he declares … Finally, the testimony does not establish that all (or which part) of the items covered by the $375 in repair tickets were connected with efforts to make the engine run smoothly.

Kaufman Northwest, Inc. v. Bi-Stone Fuel Co.

529 S.W.2d 281 · Court of Appeals of Texas · Oct 23, 1975

Clearly the Soil Conservation Service is a “business” within the meaning of the statute. … Thus, to establish a proper predicate appellee was required to meet only the requirements of paragraphs (a), (b) and (c) in Section 1 through the testimony of a qualified witness.

Brady v. McCuistion

210 S.W. 815 · Court of Appeals of Texas · Mar 5, 1919

Gist, January 15, 1907, who thereafter died, and his wife qualified as community survivor, and as such she conveyed to J. T. Downing and Carl D. … By running course and distance from the corner so established in block 2, A.

Perry, Ex Parte James Richard "Rick"

Court of Appeals of Texas · Oct 22, 2015

When such an inquiry is conducted on the face of this record Governor Perry’s are clearly cognizable. … Clause and its accompanying immunity have their limits.

State v. Lone Star Gas Co.

129 S.W.2d 1164 · Court of Appeals of Texas · Apr 12, 1939

That decision rendered our judgment’ final and immune from attack, save only as regards the issue of the asserted denial of due process under the Federal Constitution. … One is the primary jurisdiction doctrine, firmly established in Texas & Pacific Ry. v. Abilene Cotton Oil Co., 204 U.S. 426 , 27 S.Ct. 350 , 51 L.Ed. 553 , 9 Ann.Cas. 1075.

Magnolia Petroleum Co. v. State

190 S.W.2d 581 · Court of Appeals of Texas · Nov 7, 1945

Venue and jurisdiction are clearly sev-erable under this provision, regardless of whether they would be in its absence. … Brooks to be obiter, the brief reads: “In probably the only tenuous and labored opinion he ever rendered, Judge Gaines attempted to qualify State v. Moore in Brady v.

Pan American Insurance Company v. White

321 S.W.2d 337 · Court of Appeals of Texas · Feb 6, 1959

requires a $2,000 surety bond of all licensees, not material here; providing further as follows: “In addition to the bond herein required, such licensee shall be required to procure from some reliable insurance carrier qualified … “Exceptions to the venue statute must be strictly construed and clearly established before a citizen can be deprived of his right under the statutes (Art. 1995) to be sued in the county of his domicile.”

Village Mobile Homes, Inc. v. Porter

716 S.W.2d 543 · Court of Appeals of Texas · Jun 25, 1986

Appellant next contends that, as a matter of law, it had established the defense of tender under § 17.-50A(d). We disagree. … Obviously, in order for appellant to have violated art. 5069-6A.05(2), Kensington Mortgage must first qualify as a “creditor.”

Leyendecker v. Harlow

189 S.W.2d 706 · Court of Appeals of Texas · Jul 19, 1945

Liberty and Chambers County areas; that he was familiar with the Harlow car, before and after the wreck; that he saw it at least every two weeks, and knew that it was in A-l mechanical condition; that it was a part of the established … There was ample corroboration from a number of other witnesses, who showed themselves fully qualified to give their own opinions and observations upon the questions so at issue.

Ragland v. Kelner

221 S.W.2d 355 · Court of Appeals of Texas · Nov 10, 1948

Kelner, in 1946, Kelly presented the will for probate and in due time qualified as executor of her estate and is now acting as such. Appellant contends the judgment should be reversed upon authority of Henry v. … Mahurin’s testimony does not establish clearly and conclusively as a matter of law that the deed was delivered with the intention on the part of Mrs. Kelner of making a final and irrevocable disposition of the property.

Miller v. Smiley

65 S.W.2d 417 · Court of Appeals of Texas · Oct 31, 1933

There may be inaccuracies and apparent inconsistencies in some of the expressions in our original opinion, but we think that opinion considered as a whole clearly shows that we based our judgment of reversal upon the holding … It seems clear to us that upon the facts alleged in the petitions, appellants have not lost their right to appeal to the courts to have the legality and binding force of their contracts established, and the contracts *Page

Page v. Lockley

176 S.W.2d 991 · Court of Appeals of Texas · Oct 15, 1943

to establish the issue, prima facie? … Shavers, supra, when it clearly implies if it does not express approval of the opinion in the Muegge case, which cited the former with approval, and expressly reaffirmed its holding?

Gaar, Scott Co. v. Shannon

52 Tex. Civ. App. 634 · Court of Appeals of Texas · Dec 16, 1908

of a- franchise to a foreign corporation expressly exempted it from license taxation, the imposition of such tax is not invalid, and does not impair the obligation of any contract, and that no corporation could claim an immunity … We think the quotations from the foregoing authorities amply establish the principle that the State has the authority to impose a franchise tax, and that the same is constitutional.

Webb v. Jorns

530 S.W.2d 847 · Court of Appeals of Texas · Oct 10, 1975

that as a matter of law the contrary of the answers returned by the jury was compelled; in all instances their contention is that the answers were so contrary to the great weight and preponderance of the evidence as to be clearly … propriety to sustain the complaint by the losing party that the jury finding against him upon the issue upon which others are conditionally submitted is so contrary to the great weight and preponderance of the evidence as to be clearly

Southwestern Gas & Electric Co. v. Anderson

217 S.W.2d 47 · Court of Appeals of Texas · Nov 29, 1948

Anderson, testified without objections by appellant as to the market values of the land in question, after qualifying as witnesses to testify as to such market values. … Appellees assumed the burden of establishing the amount of damages done to their land by reason of the easement acquired by appellant.

Bogard v. Stirm

241 S.W.2d 666 · Court of Appeals of Texas · Jun 21, 1951

They were named in the will, and they have qualified. There is no ambiguity as to whether she intended the executors to take the bequest to them for themselves, or as trustees to hold for estate. … But she clearly evidenced an intention to bequeath it to a church she wished to benefit. The evidence showed that she had attended the First Methodist Church in Alvin for more than twenty *669 years.

Slocum v. United Pacific Insurance Co.

615 S.W.2d 807 · Court of Appeals of Texas · Jan 22, 1981

In his first two points of error Slocum says the trial court erred in overruling his motion for an instructed verdict because the evidence establishes as a matter of law 1) that he was in “an occupational status” at the time … prescribed by the State Board of Insurance in accordance with Article 5.06-3 of the Insurance Code, and 2) that he was “an income or wage producer” as provided in Article 5.06-3 of the Insurance Code, even if he doesn’t qualify