Case law

International Ass'n of Firefighters, Local Union No. 2390 v. City of Kingsville

568 S.W.2d 391 · Court of Appeals of Texas · Apr 27, 1978

The burden rests on the individual who challenges the Act to establish its unconstitutionality ... … Such determination would clearly be a policy decision, in that the court would have unbridled discretion to decide the size of the labor market area.

Fulbright v. State

41 S.W.3d 228 · Court of Appeals of Texas · Mar 1, 2001

While a detailed record of specific admonishments is one way to establish a knowing and intelligent waiver, and may be the better practice in most situations, there is “no formulaic questioning to establish a knowing and … While appellant desired the aid of standby counsel, once the trial court informed him that standby counsel would not be available, appellant clearly restated his intention to represent himself.

Texas & Pacific Railway v. Gott

20 Tex. Civ. App. 335 · Court of Appeals of Texas · Jan 14, 1899

The facts as alleged in pláihtiff’s petition were fairly established by the evidence. The evidence further showed that Mrs. … If this decision be sound, and the Trott cast does not purport to overrule or even qualify it, then the facts of the present case clearly impose a liability upon the railway company for which a recovery may be had.

Humphrey v. Knox

244 S.W.2d 309 · Court of Appeals of Texas · Nov 30, 1951

Humphrey filed his-plea of privilege in the class suit he did not limit or qualify it. … The factual difference clearly distinguishes the Richardson case from the one now before us.

State v. Fry

867 S.W.2d 398 · Court of Appeals of Texas · Nov 4, 1993

The burden rests upon the individual challenging the statute to establish its unconstitutionality. Id. … Money clearly falls within the well-accepted definition of “consideration.”

Stearns v. McManis

543 S.W.2d 659 · Court of Appeals of Texas · Jul 29, 1976

If the language is clearly actionable per se, the court may and should instruct the jury that it is so as a matter of law, and should not leave its character to them for determination, 36 Tex.Jur.2d 484, Libel and Slander … ON MOTION FOR REHEARING We withdraw the holding in our previous opinion that the appellant had waived the affirmative defense of qualified privilege.

Brock v. State

495 S.W.3d 1 · Court of Appeals of Texas · Jan 7, 2016

establish guilt.” … Shortly thereafter, Brock attempted to qualify his statement by stating that he intended to present testimony to Judge Lee.

Travis Life Insurance Company v. Rodriguez

326 S.W.2d 256 · Court of Appeals of Texas · Jun 17, 1959

We will, however, review the cases involving entries pertaining to subjects which ordinarily may only be established by expert testimony. American General Ins. Co. v. … The application by a single point clearly presents the question of the admissibility of the doctor’s report.

Ledesma v. State

993 S.W.2d 361 · Court of Appeals of Texas · Apr 29, 1999

We may only set aside the judgment if it is so contrary to the overwhelming weight of the evidence as to be clearly wrong and unjust. See id. … A careful review of the qualification hearing’s record supports the synopsis in the State’s brief of the factors that were established at the hearing: Judith Floyd testified that (1) she was a forensic laboratory supervisor

Smith v. State

681 S.W.2d 71 · Court of Appeals of Texas · Jun 27, 1984

The complainant would tell the salesman the work desired; the salesman would represent that work could be done but “to qualify” it was necessary to have “additional work” done. … The evidence clearly shows that appellants would not do business with a customer who did not have a deed to his or her house.

Sharp v. Reynolds

395 S.W.2d 725 · Court of Appeals of Texas · Sep 20, 1965

The Barker case is clearly distinguishable from the present case in that the facts in the Barker case show that the members of the jury were in complete agreement as to the answers which they had made and so stated to the … The question is clear and simple, and is easily understood by any person qualified to serve on a jury. It is capable of an affirmative or negative answer, and that is all the judge needs to determine.

Ripley v. Ocean Accident & Guarantee Corp.

146 S.W. 974 · Court of Appeals of Texas · Mar 23, 1912

No such objection was made to the testimony as is set out in the assignment, nor did the evidence tend to establish by parol the contents of the written contract. … No objection is made to it, nor is-there any specific objection made that it is insufficient to establish the facts which it was offered to prove.

Baldridge v. Klein

56 S.W.2d 897 · Court of Appeals of Texas · Dec 23, 1932

The facts disclose that the witness was qualified to express his opinion as to the value of the car before and after the accident, and the evidence supports the jury's finding. … The plaintiff in error was clearly guilty of negligence.

Foley Bros. Dry Goods Co. v. Settegast

133 S.W.2d 228 · Court of Appeals of Texas · Oct 26, 1939

On July 1, 1932, appellant was conducting a single mercantile establishment in' said building under the name of Foley Bros. Dry Goods Company. … against it as .to shock the conscience or show clearly that the conclusion reached was wrong or was the result of some passion, prejudice or improper motive.

International-Great Northern R. v. King

27 S.W.2d 357 · Court of Appeals of Texas · Mar 20, 1930

The subdivisions of this charge which I think are clearly obnoxious to the well-established rule *363 against the double submission of the same element of damage, are: “(a) Bodily' injuries, if any, physical pain and suffering … I am wholly unable tc follow the reasoning of the majority opinion in the holding, in effect, that the clause “bodily injuries” as used in this charge are mere words qualifying the meaning of the other elements or items of

Alexander v. State

873 S.W.2d 793 · Court of Appeals of Texas · Apr 13, 1994

We hold that the air-conditioning unit itself was an object and qualified as any extension to the body of the appellant. … Clearly this is not a mailbox or a window shutter case.

United States Fire Insurance Co. v. Stricklin

556 S.W.2d 575 · Court of Appeals of Texas · Sep 9, 1977

Of course, the trial court should not admit the opinion testimony of a witness not properly qualified as an expert. … Fire policy is distinguishable from the provision construed in Crisp in that it clearly provides a contractual measure of damages, rather than a limitation on damages.

American Glycerin Co. v. Kenridge Oil Co.

295 S.W. 633 · Court of Appeals of Texas · Apr 29, 1927

The question of unavoidable accident was clearly raised both by the pleadings and the evidence in this case. … Jones, a witness for the appellees, who qualified as a chemist.

Ex parte Rogers

10 Tex. Ct. App. 655 · Court of Appeals of Texas · Jul 1, 1881

Bishop’s Crim, Law (4th ed.), demonstrating the correctness of the principles upon which the question is decided in this opinion, presents more forcibly than we can hope or expect to, the reason of the rule, and indicates clearly … It would be to authorize the unscrupulous, through foreign agents, to prey upon the substance of our citizens, free from immunity and in contempt of the privileges and rights vouchsafed the people by the Constitution.

Clapp v. Perez

394 S.W.3d 254 · Court of Appeals of Texas · Sep 19, 2012

Herrera’s report fails to establish specifically what Drs. … The report does not clearly specify the respective standards of care and how each physician breached their respective standard of care.