Case law

Pedro Edwardo Gutierrez Alias Pete Gutierrez v. State

Texas Court of Appeals, 3rd District (Austin) · Aug 30, 2002

By point of error three, appellant challenges the factual sufficiency of the evidence to establish that he did not kill with sudden passion arising from an adequate cause. … Watson, commit[ted] an act clearly dangerous to human life, to-wit: stabbing him . . .

Dibco Underground, Inc., and Liberty Mutual Insurance Co. v. JCF Bridge & Concrete, Inc.

Texas Court of Appeals, 3rd District (Austin) · Apr 8, 2010

Liberty Mutual's counsel stated on the record in the trial court and at oral argument in this Court that Malik was the most qualified representative of Liberty Mutual to testify on the topics requested by JCF and that his … To establish a prima facie case in a suit on a sworn account, a plaintiff must strictly comply with rule 185. See Nguyen , 108 S.W.3d at 562 .

Robyn N. Jones v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.

Texas Court of Appeals, 3rd District (Austin) · Jan 26, 2015

When Jones applied to become the principal obligor on the loan, she did not qualify. … The obligation to pay a debt, on the other hand, clearly falls within the “personal trust or credit” exception to the rule of free assignability. Id. at 762-63.

Silicon Laboratories Inc.// Glenn Hegar, Comptroller of Public Accounts of the State of Texas And Ken Paxton, Attorney General of the State of Texas v. Glenn Hegar, Comptroller of Public Accounts of the State of Texas And Ken Paxton, Attorney General of the State of Texas// Cross-Appellee, Silicon Laboratories Inc.

Texas Court of Appeals, 3rd District (Austin) · Jul 13, 2018

concerned the EDA software tools that Silicon Labs had purchased from various vendors during the audit period, and one of the grounds raised by Silicon Labs to support its refund claims was that the EDA software tools qualified … Based on this finding, the trial court concluded that “[t]he EDA software tools sold to Silicon Labs are not qualifying items under § 151.318(a)(2)(B) because 29 they

Dibco Underground, Inc., and Liberty Mutual Insurance Co. v. JCF Bridge & Concrete, Inc.

Texas Court of Appeals, 3rd District (Austin) · Apr 8, 2010

Liberty Mutual’s counsel stated on the record in the trial court and at oral argument in this Court that Malik was the most qualified representative of Liberty Mutual to testify on the topics requested by JCF and that his … To establish a prima facie case in a suit on a sworn account, a plaintiff must strictly comply with rule 185. See Nguyen, 108 S.W.3d at 562.

Samuel Ramirez v. State

Texas Court of Appeals, 3rd District (Austin) · Jul 26, 2002

Counsel established that D.C. had lied to the grand jury about O.J. … In the instant case, the State clearly "used" the testimony. First, the State on direct examination clearly permitted D.C. to testify without correction that she was not looking for money but seeking justice.

Jimi Hofmann v. State

Texas Court of Appeals, 3rd District (Austin) · Jul 8, 2005

They discussed parentage once during the evening, Jimi Hofmann said; he told A.K. that a DNA test had established that C.H. was Jimi Hofmann’s son, but that no test had ever established that he was A.K.’s father. … DISCUSSION Factual Sufficiency of the Evidence Jimi Hofmann contends that the jury’s verdict is contrary to the overwhelming weight of the evidence and therefore clearly unjust and wrong.

Travis Central Appraisal District, by and Through Marya Crigler, Acting in Her Official Capacity as Chief Appraiser of Travis Central Appraisal District v. Texas Disposal Systems Landfill, Inc.

Texas Court of Appeals, 3rd District (Austin) · Feb 18, 2022

But in contrast to a Section 42.02(a) appeal, a Section 42.01 appeal is against an appraisal district—a political subdivision of the State with governmental immunity, id. § 6.01(c)—and therefore implicates the mandate that … to resolve new protest grounds would denigrate the administrative hearing process and the exclusive-remedies scheme established by the Property Tax Code.”

Texas Department of Insurance v. Reconveyance Services, Inc.

Texas Court of Appeals, 3rd District (Austin) · Aug 31, 2007

It disputes only whether Reconveyance's pleadings are sufficient to affirmatively establish the district court's subject matter jurisdiction. … Reconveyance pleads that its "[p]ost closing mortgage release services" are not covered by the "premium" because they "are clearly not title insurance," "title examination," or "closing the transaction."

Texas Department of Insurance v. Reconveyance Services, Inc.

Texas Court of Appeals, 3rd District (Austin) · Aug 31, 2007

It disputes only whether Reconveyance’s pleadings are sufficient to affirmatively establish the district court’s subject matter jurisdiction. … Reconveyance pleads that its “[p]ost closing mortgage release services” are not covered by the “premium” because they “are clearly not title insurance,” “title examination,” or “closing the transaction.”

Samuel Ramirez v. State

Texas Court of Appeals, 3rd District (Austin) · Jul 26, 2002

Counsel established that D.C. had lied to the grand jury about O.J. … In the instant case, the State clearly Aused@ the testimony.

Raul Zavala Robledo v. State

Texas Court of Appeals, 3rd District (Austin) · Dec 17, 1998

The record in the instant case is inadequate to clearly establish that trial counsel failed to review certain matters or was totally unaware of other matters. … Clearly, appellant has failed to show harm.

the Scott Fetzer Company D/B/A the Kirby Company v. Dena Kristi Read

Texas Court of Appeals, 3rd District (Austin) · May 1, 1997

First, it was not established that, even if the Boys Club had known of Mullens's conviction, it would have prohibited him from being a volunteer. … Although no one was injured on that earlier occasion, the supervisor was clearly aware of the pothole and knew that his crew was working near it the day of Ung's death. Id.

Jonathan Barnes v. State

Texas Court of Appeals, 3rd District (Austin) · Apr 7, 2005

Over appellant’s objection that Nauert was not qualified to answer this question, she replied, “Not necessarily. … Mason clearly testified to her belief that C.B. would be traumatized if she were required to appear in open court and testify in appellant’s presence.

Jimi Hofmann v. State

Texas Court of Appeals, 3rd District (Austin) · Jul 8, 2005

They discussed parentage once during the evening, Jimi Hofmann said; he told A.K. that a DNA test had established that C.H. was Jimi Hofmann's son, but that no test had ever established that he was A.K.'s father. … DISCUSSION Factual Sufficiency of the Evidence Jimi Hofmann contends that the jury's verdict is contrary to the overwhelming weight of the evidence and therefore clearly unjust and wrong.

Thomas Krausz v. State

Texas Court of Appeals, 3rd District (Austin) · Sep 23, 2015

Appellant argues in his brief that the report was not hearsay because it qualified as an admission by a party opponent under Tex.R.Evid. 801(e)(2). … An abuse of discretion occurs if the court’s decision is so clearly wrong as to lie outside the zone of reasonable disagreement. Taylor v.

Christina Lyons v. State

Texas Court of Appeals, 3rd District (Austin) · Feb 26, 2015

whom the statement was made; and (6) the existence of independent corroborating facts.72 On this record, the district court would not have abused its discretion in finding that the statements did not qualify … for the hearsay exception because there were not sufficient corroborating circumstances that clearly indicated their trustworthiness.

Waldrep v. Texas Employers Insurance Ass'n

21 S.W.3d 692 · Texas Court of Appeals, 3rd District (Austin) · Jul 27, 2000

The fact that the athletic department at TCU established practice and meeting times to be observed by those playing football does not establish that TCU had the right to direct and control all aspects of the players’ activities … Waldrep clearly presented evidence that TCU exercised direction or control over some of his activities while a student at the university.

Adrian D. Lagunas v. State

Texas Court of Appeals, 3rd District (Austin) · Aug 26, 2005

First, he argues that D.M.’s statements do not qualify as “excited utterances” so as to be excepted from the hearsay rule. See Tex. R. Evid. 803(2). … App. 2002). 18 made for the purpose of establishing or proving some fact.

Devvy Kidd John Kidd M. J. Shadden John Cole R.M.Daiey Tracy Stephens Patricia Stroyick Dorothy Morrow Charles Morrow Amy Williams David Williams Norman Kuehn Elizabeth Theiss Rebecca Gutierrez Marie Nugent Steve G. Crutchfield v. Texas Public Utility Commission AEP Texas Central Company AEP Texas North Company CenterPoint Energy Houston Electric, LLC Texas-New Mexico Power Company And Oncor Electric Delivery Company, LLC

Texas Court of Appeals, 3rd District (Austin) · Feb 23, 2015

Therefore, the suit is barred by the well-established doctrine of sovereign immunity. 2  In addition to the points discussed below, the Utility Appellees adopt and incorporate … Scientists are not immune to the behavior.