Case law

Circle C Child Development Center, Inc. v. Travis Central Appraisal District

Texas Court of Appeals, 3rd District (Austin) · Nov 30, 1998

The sole issue before this Court is whether a "child development center" qualifies as a school for purposes of obtaining tax-exempt status pursuant to section 11.21 of the Texas Tax Code. … If there is no evidence supporting the finding, then we will examine the entire record to determine if the contrary proposition has been established as a matter of law. See id .

John J. Dominguez, M.D. v. Don A. Gilbert, Commissioner, and Sharon Thompson, Director, Medicaid Fraud Unit, Texas Health and Human Services Commission

Texas Court of Appeals, 3rd District (Austin) · May 17, 2001

The issue before us is whether the information qualifies for an exception under the Act. … The burden is on the party seeking to avoid discovery to plead the basis for exemption or immunity and to produce evidence supporting that claim. . . .

Combs v. Chevron, Inc.

319 S.W.3d 836 · Texas Court of Appeals, 3rd District (Austin) · Aug 27, 2010

Leases of tangible personal property qualify as taxable “sales.” See id. § 151.005(2). Scaffolding qualifies as tangible personal property. See id. § 151.009. … This language clearly indicates that a motion for rehearing can only include claims that the Comptroller has already decided on.

Southwest Royalties, Inc. v. Susan Combs, Comptroller of Public Accounts of the State of Texas And Greg Abbott, Attorney General of the State of Texas

501 S.W.3d 95 · Texas Court of Appeals, 3rd District (Austin) · Aug 13, 2014

In the trial, Southwest again urged that it qualified for a tax exemption. … Accounts, Burden of Proof) (establishing that taxpayer has burden of establishing by “clear and convincing evidence” that transaction is tax exempt).

Diamond Hydraulics, Inc. v. GAC Equipment, LLC D/B/A Austin Crane Service

Texas Court of Appeals, 3rd District (Austin) · Aug 30, 2024

“The fact that a party needs an expert to establish its cause of action does not establish that other parties will not be unfairly surprised by the late designation of an expert.” Id. … Diamond argues that the evidence is insufficient because Studer is not qualified to testify as an expert on whether Diamond performed the repair in a good and workman like manner. 9 Austin responds that Studer is qualified

Barbara J. Booker v. City of Austin

Texas Court of Appeals, 3rd District (Austin) · Mar 13, 2013

Garcia, 372 S.W.3d 629, 636 (Tex. 2012) (recognizing that TCHRA similarly waives governmental immunity). … Aug. 31, 2012) (sovereign or governmental immunity is jurisdictional barrier to suit and thus may be raised for the first time on appeal).

James McCoy v. Dale Wainwright, Chairman of the Texas Board of Criminal Justice, and Kenneth Green, Disciplinary Captain of the Michael Unit

Texas Court of Appeals, 3rd District (Austin) · Dec 12, 2019

Wainwright further contends that dismissal with prejudice was proper because McCoy falsely claimed that he was indigent when the record established that he was able to pay costs. … Further, a motion for new trial must explain the asserted grounds with sufficient specificity that “the objection can be clearly identified and understood by the court,” and general objections “shall not be considered by

Carole Keeton Rylander, Comptroller of Public Accounts of the State of Texas, and John Cornyn, Attorney General of the State of Texas v. Associated Technics Company, Inc. Olmos Abatement, Inc. And Stacliff (Milam) Associates, LP

Texas Court of Appeals, 3rd District (Austin) · Mar 25, 1999

On appeal, the Comptroller raises two issues addressing whether asbestos-abatement services qualify as taxable services under the Tax Code. … The purpose of these sections is to establish the means of control and minimization of public exposure to airborne asbestos fibers . . . by regulating asbestos disturbance activities in buildings that afford public access

Gattis v. Duty

349 S.W.3d 193 · Texas Court of Appeals, 3rd District (Austin) · Aug 24, 2011

Miranda, 133 S.W.3d 217 ,] 227-28 [ (Tex.2004) ] (regarding whether parks and wildlife department acted with gross negligence so as to waive sovereign immunity under the recreational use statute). … Although the attorney was never placed under oath, the supreme court observed that counsel was "clearly attempting to prove the existence and terms of the settlement" and held that opposing counsel had waived any complaint

Sanadco Inc., a Texas Corporation Mahmoud Ahmed Isba Broadway Grocery, Inc. Shariz, Inc. Ruby & Sons Store, Inc. And Rubina Noorani v. Glenn Hegar, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Comptroller of Public Accounts Office of Comptroller of Public Accounts for the State of Texas And Ken Paxton, in His Official Capacity as Attorney General of the State of Texas

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

Accordingly, the court was in error by requiring compliance with Chapter 112 to establish its jurisdiction and should reverse its ruling requiring compliance with Chapter 112 as to these plaintiffs and remand the cause … CONCLUSION The court’s opinion that jurisdiction over Appellants’ claims is predicated upon compliance with Chapter 112 is clearly erroneous and must be reconsidered. R.

7-Eleven, Inc. v. Combs

311 S.W.3d 676 · Texas Court of Appeals, 3rd District (Austin) · May 19, 2010

Canmax store software was geared toward automating 7-Eleven’s retail stores, not data-processing services; and (5) 7-Eleven’s claims are barred by the doctrines of exhaustion of administrative remedies, ripeness, sovereign immunity … According to the State, the “purpose” requirement of section 151.006 is not met because “7-Eleven’s actual use of the Software clearly evidences a purchase for its own use, as opposed to a transfer of Software to a third

Becky, Ltd. v. the City of Cedar Park, Matt Powell, Stephen Thomas, Lyle Grimes, Lowell Moore, Jon Lux, and Don Tracy

Texas Court of Appeals, 3rd District (Austin) · Jun 15, 2015

To qualify for the ultra vires exception to governmental immunity, a suit “must not complain of a government officer’s exercise of discretion, but rather must allege, and ultimately prove, that the officer acted without … Additionally, a plaintiff must establish an “interest in a conflict distinct from that of the general public.” Williams v.

In Re DM

191 S.W.3d 381 · Texas Court of Appeals, 3rd District (Austin) · Mar 30, 2006

This provision in no way indicates that parents enjoy a presumption of "good faith efforts" and does not qualify the legal obligations created by section 41.001 in any manner. … recover from is Round Rock Independent School District, which is immune from suit.

Texas Parks & Wildlife Department v. Dearing

240 S.W.3d 330 · Texas Court of Appeals, 3rd District (Austin) · Aug 3, 2007

Prior to Smith, disparate-treatment claims were clearly actionable under the ADEA, see Hazen Paper Co. v. … If it meets the quality standards established by the U.S.

Raymond Unwin v. State of Texas

Texas Court of Appeals, 3rd District (Austin) · Apr 13, 2000

In point of error one, appellant contends the State failed to establish that Officer Bowman was qualified to testify as a drug recognition expert. … Appellant further contends the State failed to establish that drug recognition is an area of expertise on which an expert opinion may be based. These contentions were not preserved for review.

National Collegiate Athletic Association The University of Texas at Austin And Patricia Ohlendorf in Her Official Capacity and in Her Individual Capacity v. Joscelin Yeo

Texas Court of Appeals, 3rd District (Austin) · Jul 11, 2003

The Permanent Injunction Against UT-Austin The Texas Constitution provides: No citizen of this State shall be deprived of life, liberty, property, privileges or immunities, or in any manner disfranchised, except by the due … established protected liberty interest.

Tennessee Gas Pipeline Company v. Carole Keeton Rylander, Comptroller of Public Accounts for the State of Texas And John Cornyn, Attorney General for the State of Texas

Texas Court of Appeals, 3rd District (Austin) · Jun 13, 2002

Statutory exemptions from taxation are strictly construed and the claimant bears the burden of clearly showing that it falls within the exemption. North Alamo Water Supply Corp. v. … Thus, Tennessee Gas argues, it qualifies for the exemption it seeks.

Michael W. Schuetz and Jamie K. Schuetz v. Source One Mortgage Services Corporation Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc. Citimortgage, Inc. Barrett Daffin Frappier Turner & Engle Robert Ferguson, and Barbara Ferguson

Texas Court of Appeals, 3rd District (Austin) · Sep 1, 2016

MERS qualifies as a “book entry system,” as defined in the Texas Property Code and, consequently, is included within the definition of “mortgagee” under Texas law.5 See Tex. Prop. Code § 51.0001(4); Martins v. … that it is entitled to the affirmative defense of attorney immunity; (2) the Schuetzes cannot establish that they are “consumers” under the DTPA, a threshold requirement under the Act; and (3) the Schuetzes cannot produce

Texas Parks and Wildlife Department v. Lila Wilson, as Surviving Wife of Wilford Wilson and Lydia Mae Wilson, Individually, and as Independent of the Estate of Wilton Guendell Wilson

Texas Court of Appeals, 3rd District (Austin) · Jan 28, 1999

DISCUSSION Establishing liability under the Texas Tort Claims Act Under common law, the State of Texas, its agencies, and other governmental units (5) are immune from suit. See Lowe v. … This governmental immunity is waived only if liability can be established under the limited circumstances specified pursuant to the Texas Tort Claims Act. See Texas Tort Claims Act §101.025; City of Denton v.

C.C. Carlton Industries, Ltd. v. Blanchard

311 S.W.3d 654 · Texas Court of Appeals, 3rd District (Austin) · May 4, 2010

A witness may be qualified by knowledge, skill, experience, training, or education to testify as an expert. See Tex.R. Evid. 702. … Venable was qualified as an expert witness on the issue of causation, and the jury obviously found him more credible than Meyer.