Case law

Pontrey Jones v. the State of Texas

Texas Court of Appeals, 3rd District (Austin) · Sep 2, 2021

Accordingly, appellate courts reverse “only when the trial judge’s decision was so clearly wrong as to lie outside the zone within which reasonable persons might disagree.” Id. … Accordingly, Jones has failed to establish actual prejudice. Cf.

Randy Pretzer Scott Bossier Bossier Chrysler-Dodge II, Inc. D/B/A Bossier Country v. the Motor Vehicle Board and Motor Vehicle Division of the Texas Department of Transportation

Texas Court of Appeals, 3rd District (Austin) · Jan 16, 2003

another error of law; (E) not reasonably supported by substantial evidence considering the reliable and probative evidence in the record as a whole; or (F) arbitrary or capricious or characterized by abuse of discretion or clearly … Scott Bossier was aware of and authorized the use of promissory notes, which the ALJ found was part of a scheme "to get customers qualified for more expensive vehicles than those for which they would otherwise qualify, thereby

Jerome J. Isaac and Michelle P. Isaac v. Vendor Resource Management, Inc. Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc. And CitiMortgage, Inc.

Texas Court of Appeals, 3rd District (Austin) · Apr 2, 2015

)  Even if the Isaacs could establish standing, all of their claims would fail, as a matter of law, because the “summary judgment evidence conclusively establishes that (1) Citi had authority to foreclose … As a matter of law, “[t]he rules of evidence do not require that the qualified witness who lays the predicate for the admission of business records be their 14 creator, be an

Southern California Sunbelt Developers, Inc. And Dan Baer v. Donald B. Grammer Colchester Management Services, LLC Blanco Realty Advisors Limited Partnership, L.L.P. Brenda J. Grammer GGDG, Ltd. Daralyn E. Grammer-Allen Big a Technology Limited Apple Management Services, LLC Gregory M. Grammer Cherry Blossom Limited Partnership Lemon Leaf Limited Partnership Colchester Financial Limited Partnership Jaguar-Piaget Limited Partnership And Dinvest, Ltd.

Texas Court of Appeals, 3rd District (Austin) · Dec 31, 2019

Nevada law contains fact-dependent exceptions establishing when a general partner is not personally liable for a limited partnership’s obligation. See Nev. Rev. … Cf. id. at 822 (noting municipality’s assertion in Rule 91a motion that governmental immunity deprived trial court of subject-matter jurisdiction over claims and concluding that court’s denial of motion asserting such immunity

Entergy Texas, Inc.// Office of Public Utility Counsel and Public Utility Commission of Texas v. Public Utility Commission of Texas and Texas Industrial Energy Consumers// Office of Public Utility Counsel and Entergy Texas, Inc.

Texas Court of Appeals, 3rd District (Austin) · Jun 2, 2015

The Cities clearly 14 offered the 10-K and I clearly reserved optional 15 completeness. 16 MR. … Just as clearly, ginal cost of the plant.

LA VENTANA RANCH OWNERS'ASS'N v. Davis

363 S.W.3d 632 · Texas Court of Appeals, 3rd District (Austin) · Feb 1, 2012

Because the CCRs vest the AC with the power to exercise the necessary authority to enforce the terms and provisions of the CCRs, the AC qualifies as a representative designated to enforce restrictive covenants for purposes … factual sufficiency of the evidence to support a jury finding, we must consider and weigh all the evidence and should set aside the judgment only if it is so contrary to the overwhelming weight of the evidence as to be clearly

Dr. Lawrence Broder, M.D. and Round Rock Medical Aesthetics & Urgent Care PLLC D/B/A Beleza Medspa v. Nexstar Broadcast Group, Inc. KXAN-TV And Jody Barr

Texas Court of Appeals, 3rd District (Austin) · Jun 4, 2021

After an investigation, Barr reported, TMB staff determined that Broder “failed to ‘maintain an adequate medical record,’ didn’t ‘safeguard against potential complications,’ and used workers ‘not qualified’ in the operating … As for the difficulty or complexity of the work, Robb stated that appellants’ petition was more than forty pages long, contained multiple causes of action, and “failed to clearly articulate the complained-of statements

Buddy Gregg Motor Homes, Inc. v. Motor Vehicle Board of the Texas Department of Transportation

179 S.W.3d 589 · Texas Court of Appeals, 3rd District (Austin) · Nov 17, 2005

The supreme court further concluded that statements in the letter did not qualify as findings of fact. Id. … To the contrary, the letter is persuasive evidence that the repurchase demand was clearly voluntary. (Footnotes omitted.)

State v. Reynaldo Lerma

Texas Court of Appeals, 3rd District (Austin) · Oct 25, 2018

He explained, “We will put in automatically to destroy the evidence on qualifying informant buys. We don’t keep those.” … In the email, Sergeant Parham states, “My report on the homicide, filed two weeks after the shooting, clearly stated that Espino was once a suspect and target of an investigation.

Herbert Rolnick v. Sight's My Line, Inc., a Florida Corporation Stewart Lantz Riggs, Aleshire & Ray Blazier, Christensen, Bigelow & Vir, P.C. And Adams & Graham

Texas Court of Appeals, 3rd District (Austin) · Jul 9, 2015

SUMMARY OF THE ARGUMENT The United States and Texas Supreme Courts have clearly articulated the Constitutional boundaries of personal jurisdiction in Texas. … Barely a year ago, the United States Supreme Court addressed what contacts qualify as “minimum contacts” necessary to create specific jurisdiction. See Walden v. Fiore, 134 S. Ct. 1115, 1122 (2014).

Mark and Debbie Walker and Shell Road Golf Center, Inc. v. City of Georgetown

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

As a general rule, to establish standing, a party must demonstrate some interest peculiar to it individually and not as a member of the general public. El Paso Cmty. Partners v. … (c) The governing body or officer shall consider clearly enunciated local preferences, and the provisions of this chapter do not constitute a mandatory prohibition against the use of the area if the

Mark and Debbie Walker and Shell Road Golf Center, Inc. v. City of Georgetown

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

As a general rule, to establish standing, a party must demonstrate some interest peculiar to it individually and not as a member of the general public. El Paso Cmty. Partners v. … The governing body or officer shall consider clearly enunciated local preferences, and the provisions of this chapter do not constitute a mandatory prohibition against the use of the area if the findings are made that justify

Engelman Irrigation District v. Texas Commission on Environmental Quality and Shields Brothers, Inc.

Texas Court of Appeals, 3rd District (Austin) · Apr 10, 2008

Within this issue, Engelman further alleges that the underlying judgment in favor of Shields Brothers is void as a matter of law, that the Order’s findings of fact are clearly erroneous, and that its conclusions of law … With respect to the enforceability issue, Engelman asserts in passing that the underlying judgment is void as a matter of law because it did not waive its governmental immunity in the original suit brought by Shields Brothers

Engelman Irrigation District v. Texas Commission on Environmental Quality and Shields Brothers, Inc.

Texas Court of Appeals, 3rd District (Austin) · Apr 10, 2008

Within this issue, Engelman further alleges that the underlying judgment in favor of Shields Brothers is void as a matter of law, that the Order's findings of fact are clearly erroneous, and that its conclusions of law are … With respect to the enforceability issue, Engelman asserts in passing that the underlying judgment is void as a matter of law because it did not waive its governmental immunity in the original suit brought by Shields Brothers

RODRIGUEZ-FLORES v. State

351 S.W.3d 612 · Texas Court of Appeals, 3rd District (Austin) · Oct 28, 2011

So, if you have already made up your mind and ruled something out, that’s one thing; but if you’re willing to keep an open mind and wait to make a decision once you’ve heard the evidence, then you’re qualified. … And it clearly is custodial contact. But is it custodial interrogation as that has been defined and described in law? I don’t know if it is or is not. This is a new issue.... I have entered those findings of fact.

Jonathan Lee Fehr v. State

Texas Court of Appeals, 3rd District (Austin) · Aug 19, 2015

Code § 30.01(1), nor even an “enclosed structure” that could qualify as a building that, under 30.01(2), could be burgled. Day v. State, 534 S.W.2d 681, 685 (Tex. Crim. … —but none of them establish Appellant’s complicity in a burglary of Pope’s residence.

Latisha McFadden v. Greg Olesky and Rogelio Sanchez

Texas Court of Appeals, 3rd District (Austin) · Jun 17, 2016

He does clearly acknowledge that it may cause death, however. (RR Vol. 5 p. 80 lines 10-25). … It is a particularly heavy comment when the Court ignores the qualifying language of Tex. Pen.

Entergy Texas, Inc.// Office of Public Utility Counsel and Public Utility Commission of Texas v. Public Utility Commission of Texas and Texas Industrial Energy Consumers// Office of Public Utility Counsel and Entergy Texas, Inc.

Texas Court of Appeals, 3rd District (Austin) · Mar 31, 2015

ETI rejects TIEC’s recommendation because it is clearly contrary to Commission policy and precedent. … To do this, it must employ (and retain) qualified officers and directors.

Scott v. State

165 S.W.3d 27 · Texas Court of Appeals, 3rd District (Austin) · May 12, 2005

Scott was questioned for approximately twenty hours, but he does not contend and we are not referred to authority holding that lengthy questioning, in itself, establishes custody. … Roberts, 448 U.S. 56 , 100 S.Ct. 2531 , 65 L.Ed.2d 597 (1980), which had established a different test for overcoming a Sixth Amendment confrontation objection.

Entergy Texas, Inc.// Office of Public Utility Counsel and Public Utility Commission of Texas v. Public Utility Commission of Texas and Texas Industrial Energy Consumers// Office of Public Utility Counsel and Entergy Texas, Inc.

Texas Court of Appeals, 3rd District (Austin) · Mar 31, 2015

ESTABLISHING OVERALL REVENUES. … Morgan, 313 tion or clearly unwarranted exercise of discretion. U.S. at 421, 61 S.Ct. at 1004.