Case law

Wood Motor Co. v. Nebel

232 S.W.2d 772 · Court of Appeals of Texas · Jul 27, 1950

If any failure without rhyme or reason to perform would excuse, appellant could have so clearly stated in Sec. 4. It did not. … Secs. 8 and 9 of the main agreement to be discussed under the next point further refute this claim that appellant could with immunity refuse to deliver new cars without any reason.

Texas Department of Transportation v. Shaw

847 S.W.2d 618 · Court of Appeals of Texas · Dec 30, 1992

Accordingly, Ben Shaw, individually and in his official capacity, is immune from liability for negligence, as an employee in his official capacity performing a governmental function is immune from suit for the torts of officers … Shaw is not entitled to summary judgment on the basis of the doctrine of sovereign immunity.

Save Our Springs Alliance, Inc. v. City of Kyle

382 S.W.3d 540 · Court of Appeals of Texas · Aug 30, 2012

” in order to qualify for a conditional permit. … The District filed a general denial and asserted the affirmative defense of immunity from the City’s request for declaratory relief.

Connie Rogge, Individually and as Heir of Richard Hollas Rogge, Richard Rogge, Individually and as Heir of Richard Hollas Rogge and Richard Rogge as Administrator of the Estate of Richard Hollas Rogge v. the City of Richmond, Texas

506 S.W.3d 570 · Court of Appeals of Texas · Sep 29, 2016

I would not dismiss the case for insufficient pleading of jurisdictional facts without giving the Rogges the chance to replead, in clear contravention of established authority. … I would hold that the Rogges’ pleadings, which are supported by evidence of the jurisdictional facts, are clearly sufficient to support waiver of the City’s immunity to their premises defect claim under the Tort Claims Act

Scott's Marina at Lake Grapevine Ltd. v. Brown

365 S.W.3d 146 · Court of Appeals of Texas · Jan 28, 2012

The jury clearly resolved this conflict by determining that the substance that backflowed into the Store was sewage containing human feces. … This fusobacterium is prevented from causing infections by the body’s natural immune system.

City of Galena Park v. Barry Ponder

503 S.W.3d 625 · Court of Appeals of Texas · Oct 25, 2016

But, Ponder must establish that the petition supported the submission of the proposed charter amendments. … Galena Park did not establish its entitlement to summary judgment based on its first ground. 2.

In the Interest of M.A.M.

35 S.W.3d 788 · Court of Appeals of Texas · Feb 8, 2001

is clearly wrong and unjust. … The qualifying phrase, “deemed by the court to have had substantial past contact with the child,” modifies “other person,” not “grandparent or other person.”

Combs v. Texas Entertainment Ass'n, Inc.

287 S.W.3d 852 · Court of Appeals of Texas · Jun 5, 2009

For example, Steven White, a program specialist in the Comptroller’s tax policy division, testified that if a play involving nudity was held at a bar or other establishment that serves alcohol, the owner of the establishment … Holland, 221 S.W.3d 639, 643 (Tex.2007) (“Absent an express waiver of its sovereign immunity, the State is generally immune from suit.”).

Callaghan v. Tobin

40 Tex. Civ. App. 441 · Court of Appeals of Texas · Nov 1, 1905

In other *449 sections the city council is given the care, management and control of . the city and its property, and is given the authority to establish a police force and regulate the same and to establish, regulate and … The first case is one decided by the Court of Criminal Appeals and clearly does not touch anything connected with this case.

Barnum v. Lancaster Hardware Co.

40 S.W.2d 1103 · Court of Appeals of Texas · Jun 20, 1931

Henrietta Barnum is the duly qualified and acting admin-istratrix of such estate, and the suit was instituted against' her in such capacity only; her husband, G. S. … Barnum is alleged to be the duly qualified and acting administra-trix.

Garitty v. Halbert

235 S.W. 231 · Court of Appeals of Texas · Oct 29, 1921

to vote to amend the charter of the city of Corsicana must “be a qualified property taxpayer, and own property subject to taxation.” … The ballot used at said election clearly expressed *238 the object of the election in keeping with the ordinance under which said election was held.

City of Trinity v. McPhail

131 S.W.2d 803 · Court of Appeals of Texas · Jul 13, 1939

qualified to testify as an expert, and his testimony is admissible as such. … Under the above authorities, the testimony of the above witnesses was clearly admissible for the purpose of establishing the fact that there was a market value for such property as that condemned, and under the record appellant

Wooley v. Sterrett

387 S.W.2d 734 · Court of Appeals of Texas · Feb 19, 1965

A review of the entire record in this case clearly indicates that the election in question was not held with the degree of perfection that should be desired. … Jack Ballard, the presiding judge, testified that he “was interested in a fair and impartial election,” and did not even vote, though qualified to do so.

State v. American Legion Post No. 58

611 S.W.2d 720 · Court of Appeals of Texas · Jan 28, 1981

The facts alleged by these Plaintiffs do not establish the absence of a right of action nor do they establish an insuperable barrier to a right of recovery. Swilley v. Hughes, 488 S.W.2d 64 at 67 (Tex.1972). … If the property comes within a statutory exemption, it can be exempt only because it is clearly embraced within the Constitutional authorization. City of Beaumont v.

Port of Houston Authority v. West

782 S.W.2d 337 · Court of Appeals of Texas · Dec 21, 1989

The Port has filed a motion for partial summary judgment asserting that its affirmative defense of governmental immunity against Manchester’s claims is established as a matter of law. … The Port argued unsuccessfully in the trial court that subsection 101.104(b) bars discovery of insurance information in this case, which does not involve the Tort Claims Act, because the latter subsection is not qualified

Andino v. State

645 S.W.2d 615 · Court of Appeals of Texas · Jan 5, 1983

Walker, [ 161 U.S. 591, 599 , 16 S.Ct. 644, 647 , 40 L.Ed. 819 (1896) ], the prosecutor must then determine whether the answer is of such overriding importance as to justify a grant of immunity to the witness. *621 If immunity … On the other hand, when granted immunity, a witness once again owes the obligation imposed upon all citizens — the duty to give testimony — since immunity substitutes for the privilege, [emphasis added] Cf., Tex.Code Cr.P.Ann

Borderlon v. Peck

643 S.W.2d 233 · Court of Appeals of Texas · Nov 24, 1982

This has usually resulted from a failure to disclose facts which would establish a cause of action. Nichols v. Smith, 507 S.W.2d 518 (Tex.1974). … Witherspoon in his article, “Constitutionality of the Texas Statute Limiting Liability for Medical Malpractice,” 10 Tex.Tech L.Rev. 419 at 425 (1979), writes: [ T]he Act clearly immunizes physicians from one form of intentional

Texas Department of Mental Health & Mental Retardation v. Petty Ex Rel. Kauffman

817 S.W.2d 707 · Court of Appeals of Texas · Nov 27, 1991

GOVERNMENTAL IMMUNITY Because the Department is an entity of the State, within the doctrine of governmental immunity, Ms. Petty was obliged to establish legislative consent to suit, see Missouri Pacific R. Co. v. … The Department argues that the “question allows a finding of negligence based on the use of the enumerated property by any one of several hundred employees during a fifteen-year period without clearly establishing proximate

State ex rel. Criminal District Attorney ex rel. Lindsey v. City of Marshall

347 S.W.2d 274 · Court of Appeals of Texas · May 2, 1961

The effect of the holding, in my opinion, is to render the ordinance involved in this case immune to attack for any reason. … majority of the names of such qualified voters.

Hegar v. Autohaus LP

514 S.W.3d 897 · Court of Appeals of Texas · Feb 24, 2017

Standard of Review Absent an express waiver of its sovereign immunity, the State is generally immune from suit, depriving the courts of subject matter jurisdiction over suits against the state or its subdivisions. … And, because there is no waiver of immunity under the UDJA, any going-forward effect is immaterial.