Case law

City of El Paso v. Collins

483 S.W.3d 742 · Court of Appeals of Texas · Jan 20, 2016

of Jade’s accident, and had at most established that there was a problem with the filtration system three days after Jade’s accident. … Governmental Immunity As we explained in Collins I, the State of Texas and its political subdivisions, including cities and counties, have immunity, from lawsuits seeking monetary damages unless immunity is. clearly and unambiguously

Richardson v. Thompson

390 S.W.2d 830 · Court of Appeals of Texas · Apr 16, 1965

That statute provides that every person who under color of any statute, etc. of any state subjects any citizen to the deprivation of any rights, privileges or immunities secured by the Constitution and laws shall be liable … The duties of the Commission are to establish a vocational rehabilitation program for the blind; to cooperate with, enter into agreements with, and to adopt methods of administration of the Federal Government in carrying

Jenicke v. City of Forest Hill

873 S.W.2d 776 · Court of Appeals of Texas · May 10, 1994

If there are none, the City is immune from liability pursuant to section 101.-055(3) as a matter of law by the doctrine of governmental immunity. See Ross v. … It is well established that 42 U.S.C. § 1983 does not itself create substantive rights; it merely provides a remedy for federal rights established elsewhere. City of Oklahoma City v.

Davis v. Esperado Mining Co.

750 S.W.2d 887 · Court of Appeals of Texas · May 12, 1988

The mineral deed, which is part of the summary judgment evidence, clearly establishes that the mineral estate was conveyed to Mel LaVergne seven years before the accident occurred. … Batt and Mel LaVergne clearly reflect that the mine shaft was in existence when appellee acquired the mineral interest.

Metro. Transit Auth. of Harris Cnty. v. Ridley

540 S.W.3d 91 · Court of Appeals of Texas · Sep 7, 2017

Metro has government immunity, except for limited waivers. … Metro's plea to the jurisdiction argued that she failed to establish a prima facie case of disparate treatment for a myriad of reasons: (1) no evidence Ridley was qualified for the position, (2) Ridley's concession that she

McKinney v. Air Venture Corp.

578 S.W.2d 849 · Court of Appeals of Texas · Mar 1, 1979

The record shows that the other expert witnesses were not qualified to evaluate his conduct and did not attempt to do so. … McKinney’s employer, a subscriber under the Act, it follows as a matter of law that it is immune from this action.

Lopez v. PUBLIC UTILITY COM'N OF TEXAS

816 S.W.2d 776 · Court of Appeals of Texas · Sep 25, 1991

of § 1983, which statute does not override the traditional sovereign immunity of the States. … This premise may be established only in a direct proceeding under PURA § 26(e), and reviewed for errors of law under PURA § 69.

Bergman v. Oshman's Sporting Goods, Inc.

594 S.W.2d 814 · Court of Appeals of Texas · Jan 31, 1980

Appellees clearly had an interest in the subject matter of the communication, i. e., the honest and efficient operation of their business enterprise. … The summary judgment proof clearly established that the only person to whom the statement was made, Don Eisenstein, did not understand the statement to be defamatory.

Huntress v. State Ex Rel. Todd

88 S.W.2d 636 · Court of Appeals of Texas · Nov 20, 1935

This is an elementary rule of statutory construction which is so well understood and established as to admit of no serious argument. … By no theory of construction or stretch of the imagination could this or any other court hold, as a matter of law, from a fair consideration of the applicable statutes and the facts clearly established in the record, that

Anheuser-Busch, L.L.C. v. Harris County Tax Assessor-Collector

516 S.W.3d 1 · Court of Appeals of Texas · Oct 11, 2016

Governmental Immunity Before reaching the merits, we address HCTAC’s contention that the trial court lacked subject-matter jurisdiction because Anheuser-Busch failed to establish a waiver of sovereign immunity. … When bringing suit against a governmental unit, the plaintiff bears the burden of establishing the court’s subject matter jurisdiction by alleging a valid waiver of immunity. Dallas Area Rapid Transit v.

In re Texas Parks & Wildlife Department

483 S.W.3d 795 · Court of Appeals of Texas · Feb 10, 2016

In its answer, TPWD raised affirmative defenses including sovereign immunity. TPWD filed a combined plea to the jurisdiction and motion for summary judgment under Tex.R.Civ.P. 166a(b). … First, the relator must show that the trial court clearly abused its discretion. In re Prudential Insurance Company of America, 148 S.W.3d 124, 135 (Tex.2004).

Anderson v. Crow

260 S.W.2d 227 · Court of Appeals of Texas · Jul 15, 1953

I find that the established polling place at the East Central Rural High School was in distance from 5 to 22 miles from the homes and customary polling places of an overwhelming majority of the qualified voters, whereas the … We are further of the opinion that the Board of Trustees was clearly within its statutory authority in establishing but one voting place within the school district.

State v. Noser

422 S.W.2d 594 · Court of Appeals of Texas · Oct 19, 1967

and their plea to the jurisdiction based on sovereign immunity would have to be sustained. … jurisdiction based on sovereign immunity should be sustained.

Violanda Soledad v. Texas Farm Bureau Mutual Insurance Company

506 S.W.3d 600 · Court of Appeals of Texas · Nov 2, 2016

STANDARD OF REVIEW Summary judgment is proper if the movant establishes that there are no genuine issues of material fact and that the movant is entitled to judgment as a matter of law. Tex. R. Civ. … She argues “that this policy language clearly indicates that an insured person should be able to collect UM/UIM benefits after first receiving workers’ compensation benefits.”

Garvey v. Cain

197 S.W. 765 · Court of Appeals of Texas · Jul 13, 1917

No citizen should be denied the franchise unless it be clearly apparent that he is not a qualified voter. “The votes challenged by contestees should be deducted from the total of the votes cast against prohibition. … This is clearly the principle announced in the case of Aldridge v. Hamlin, 184 S.

Clayton v. Reamer

153 S.W.2d 1020 · Court of Appeals of Texas · Jul 17, 1941

Condit had any conversations with Leonard Rice he knew nothing about such conversations — appellants relied upon the testimony of Leonard Rice, a negro, to establish the fact that Condit made statements qualifying and limiting … There was nothing in the evidence in this issue to prejudice appellants’ defense against appellees’ plea of limitation, which, in our judgment, on the evidence as a whole, was clearly established.

Loftin v. Morales

187 S.W.3d 533 · Court of Appeals of Texas · Dec 14, 2005

, as a matter of law, entitled to official immunity. … When official immunity shields a governmental employee from liability, sovereign immunity shields the governmental employer from vicarious liability. Id.

Astoria Industries of Iowa, Inc. v. SNF, Inc.

223 S.W.3d 616 · Court of Appeals of Texas · Apr 26, 2007

Thus, the record clearly shows that Astoria’s no-evidence motion for summary judgment was, indeed, based on a defense arising under the federal and state Free Speech Clauses. … did not extend to the city’s sovereign immunity defense); Boozier v.

Texas Commission on Environmental Quality v. Exxon Mobil Corporation ExxonMobil Oil Corporation Pennzoil-Quaker State Company And Shell Oil Company

504 S.W.3d 532 · Court of Appeals of Texas · Oct 31, 2016

Specifically, in three issues, the Commission contends that (1) the Act establishes two separate types of Superfund orders found in Sections 361.188 and 361.272 with distinct waivers of immunity found in Sections 361.321 … The EPA conducted a removal action in 1996, although the Site’s ranking was too low to qualify the Site for the federal Superfund program.

FLCT, Ltd. v. City of Frisco

493 S.W.3d 238 · Court of Appeals of Texas · May 26, 2016

that derives 75 percent or more of the establishment’s gross revenue from the on-premise sale of alcoholic beverages; or (3) an establishment that: (A) derives 50 percent or more of the establishment’s gross revenue from … issued a permit under Chapter 32 or 33 if: (1) the establishment derives 35 percent or more of the establishment’s gross revenue from the on-premises sale or service of alcoholic beverages and the premises of the establishment