Case law

In the Interest of C.H.

25 S.W.3d 38 · Court of Appeals of Texas · Apr 20, 2000

Hylton could attempt reunification efforts or there was placement with a qualifying relative, or adoption by another family. … If the conduct for which the parent is incarcerated shows voluntary and deliberate actions, it qualifies as conduct endangering the emotional well-being of a child.

Strickland Transportation Co. v. Ingram

403 S.W.2d 192 · Court of Appeals of Texas · Apr 26, 1966

Of course there are exceptions to this general rule, as well established as the rule itself, but enumeration of such exceptions will serve no purpose at this point. … The qualifying factor in Hawkins Ingram’s testimony that he later learned, that is, learned after the collision occurred, that Strickland Transportation Company, Inc., owned the truck at the time of collision confines the

Rourke v. Garza

511 S.W.2d 331 · Court of Appeals of Texas · May 9, 1974

The evidence does not establish that at that time the absence of cleat type devices on the boards was readily apparent to the casual observer. … Rourke contends that the provisions in the indemnity agreement under discussion clearly fall within exceptions (1) and (2) stated above.

Lone Star Gas Co. v. Bradford

147 S.W.2d 547 · Court of Appeals of Texas · Jan 10, 1941

He qualified as an expert and testified to the quality of each of the two gases used. … The doctor said he responded to the treatment slowly; that the cardiagram indicated clearly that he had a blocking of an artery in the heart muscle.

Brown v. Fore

299 S.W. 950 · Court of Appeals of Texas · Nov 5, 1927

Fore and should be administered as a part of such estate by appellants as the duly qualified executors. The executors answered the suit and made the same claim set up by the in-terveners. … He was, however, a defendant in his capacity as one of the éxecutors of the estate in which he was clearly an opposite party to appellee. We therefore overrule this assignment of error.

MISSOURI PACIFIC RAILROAD COMPANY v. Little

319 S.W.2d 785 · Court of Appeals of Texas · Dec 18, 1958

A., access to its courts would, if it permitted access to its own citizens, violate the Privileges and Immunities Clause. Constitution, Art. IV, § 2; McKnett v. St. Louis & S. F. Ry. … We think this language clearly supports our holding that venue, as distinguished from jurisdiction, is established by state enactment and is subject to state law.

Republic of Texas Savings Ass'n v. Island Recreational Development Corp.

680 S.W.2d 588 · Court of Appeals of Texas · Oct 25, 1984

We find that Paragraph Fifteen, which clearly prohibits assignment or reassignment to the bank, without prior consent, was breached. … The agreed bargain was that the permanent funder would have thirty full days to investigate and study the applications of each qualified buyer.

Thorn v. State

961 S.W.2d 12 · Court of Appeals of Texas · Nov 27, 1996

The justice’s principal advice in regard to appellant’s running for office was “that he do whatever is necessary to qualify.” … We conclude it is factually sufficient to affirmatively establish that appellant committed perjury.

Levy v. State

28 Tex. Ct. App. 203 · Court of Appeals of Texas · Nov 13, 1889

Defendant objected to such contradictory evidence, upon the ground that, it is only upon a denial, direct or qualified, by the witness that he had made such statements that proof of his having done so was authorized and allowable … Defendant’s language used at the instant after he fired the fatal shot, as testified to by his witnesses Ditto and Darwin, “I am no son-of-a-bitch, and my mother is no whore,” most clearly indicates his motive in and the

Missouri, Kansas & Texas Railway Co. v. Cherry

44 Tex. Civ. App. 232 · Court of Appeals of Texas · Nov 17, 1906

Whatever may, then, legitimately tend to show the character and extent of such pain or anguish is clearly admissible. … A bill of exceptions was reserved, which the court qualifies by stating "that during the progress of the trial Herbert Ardrey, one of the assistant county attorneys, came into the court room and approached the court and stated

Slayter v. Home Indemnity Co.

426 S.W.2d 632 · Court of Appeals of Texas · Mar 13, 1968

The statute shows by its provisions to have been enacted for the purpose of establishing a procedure under which, in proper circumstances, an injured employee may be required to submit to curative surgical procedures or suffer … It has been clearly resolved that a party must object to evidence as it is presented before a judgment will be reversed for overruling a motion in limine. The judgment of the trial court is affirmed. Affirmed.

Brunner Fire Company v. Payne

54 Tex. Civ. App. 501 · Court of Appeals of Texas · Mar 20, 1909

The statute (articles 1367, 1368, 1369) prescribes very clearly the duty of the judge and the rights of litigants in such cases, and should be observed. … Where the undisputed evidence establishes a fact, it is not in error for the court to so instruct the jury. The seventeenth assignment of error presenting this objection to the charge of the court is without merit.

Tarrant Appraisal District v. Colonial Country Club

767 S.W.2d 230 · Court of Appeals of Texas · Mar 8, 1989

Colonial’s position may be summed up thusly: the Greenbelt Act is a valid constitutional legislative enactment; Colonial qualifies for appraisal under the Act; even if Colonial does not qualify under the Greenbelt Act, the … Such amenities are clearly incidental to the enjoyment of the recreational area and should not affect its status as such. Points of error ten and eleven are overruled. B.

Nations v. Ulmer

139 S.W.2d 352 · Court of Appeals of Texas · Jan 25, 1940

Should either of them fail or refuse to qualify, the other is hereby authorized to act as fully as if both had qualified. … is necessary to probate my will and establish this trust.

Underwriters at Lloyds, London v. Harkins

427 S.W.2d 659 · Court of Appeals of Texas · Apr 10, 1968

The parties are therefore bound by the clearly expressed terms of the policy. … If the Henderson case establishes a Texas “rule of reasonableness,” can the delay here presented be said to be reasonable? Here the sickness was known by the appellees at the outset.

Verticor, Ltd. v. Michael Wood

509 S.W.3d 488 · Court of Appeals of Texas · Nov 13, 2015

Verticor cannot prevail, as it acknowledges, unless it can establish that it is a “health care provider” as defined by the TMLA. … Nor does the Act’s definition of “health care provider” clearly depart from that meaning.

Barber v. Mercer

303 S.W.3d 786 · Court of Appeals of Texas · Oct 15, 2009

Mercer contends this experience is insufficient because it “does not establish how he could legitimately be qualified by training or experience to opine as to the scope of Dr. … Although it was the same expert supplying the amended report whom the trial court had previously found qualified, this time the trial court ruled that the expert was not qualified to render the report and limited its ruling

Motorola, Inc. v. Bullock

586 S.W.2d 706 · Court of Appeals of Texas · Aug 8, 1979

Motorola, Inc., first qualified to do business in Texas as an Illinois corporation in 1971, later formed a wholly owned subsidiary incorporated in Delaware, and thereafter the Illinois corporation was merged with the Delaware … Article 1.045 has as its purpose the establishment of limitation periods for the assessment and collection of certain taxes by the Comptroller.

St. Louis Southwestern Railway Co. v. Niblack

53 Tex. Civ. App. 619 · Court of Appeals of Texas · Feb 11, 1909

The physician testified very clearly and fully as to the nature of her injuries, and their effect upon her during the time he treated her. … In her petition she had alleged that her injuries had impaired her capacity to earn money "at her ordinary occupation or any other for which she is qualified, during all the balance of her future life.”

Elliott v. Bowden

564 S.W.2d 825 · Court of Appeals of Texas · Mar 31, 1978

At the outset it would appear that Bow-den does not qualify under this statute in that he is relying on F.D.I.C.’s suit, dismissed for lack of jurisdiction, in order to come within the requirements of Article 5539a. … Elliott then requested additional findings of fact and conclusions of law, but none of the requested findings of fact were relevant to the elements necessary to establish estoppel.