Case law

Texas Parks & Wildlife Department v. Milburn Dearing, Kenneth Head, and Mike Warren, Individually and on Behalf of All Others Similarly Situated

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.

Texas Racing Commission and Charla Ann King, Executive Director v. Javier Marquez D/B/A J&M Racing and Farm

Texas Court of Appeals, 3rd District (Austin) · Aug 19, 2011

To establish a trial court's subject matter jurisdiction to grant relief under the UDJA, a party must plead the existence of an "underlying controversy" within the scope of section 37.004 of the civil practice and remedies … "An act is ministerial when the law clearly spells out the duty to be performed by the official with sufficient certainty that nothing is left to the exercise of discretion." Anderson v.

in the Matter of Y. S.

Texas Court of Appeals, 3rd District (Austin) · Aug 31, 2000

In his first issue, Y.S. contends that the trial court erred in admitting testimony of a non-expert to establish the amount of the pecuniary loss. … No rigid formula determines whether a particular witness qualifies to testify as an expert. Matson v. State , 819 S.W.2d 839 , 851 n.10 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991).

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

Any ambiguity about the laws waiving sovereign immunity must be resolved in favor of immunity. Wichita Falls State Hosp. v. Taylor, 106 S.W.3d 692, 697 (Tex. 2003). … The Commission has sovereign immunity. The doctrine of sovereign immunity has been part of the jurisprudence of the State since its inception.

Michael Anthony Rodriguez v. the State of Texas

Texas Court of Appeals, 3rd District (Austin) · Aug 6, 2026

for him to have qualified as a witness who could authenticate the documents under Rule of Evidence 803(6). … Under that standard, a trial court’s ruling will only be deemed an abuse of discretion if it is so clearly wrong as to lie outside “the zone of reasonable disagreement,” Lopez v. State, 86 S.W.3d 228, 230 (Tex. Crim.

GATX Terminals Corp. v. Rylander

78 S.W.3d 630 · Texas Court of Appeals, 3rd District (Austin) · May 23, 2002

To reach a different result, GATX must establish the lack of evidentia-ry support for these findings. … Moreover, the finding is not so contrary to the overwhelming weight of the evidence as to be clearly wrong and unjust. See Cain, 709 S.W.2d at 176 .

State v. Triax Oil and Gas, Inc.

966 S.W.2d 123 · Texas Court of Appeals, 3rd District (Austin) · Mar 26, 1998

It is well established that an agency’s final order, like the final judgment of a court of law, is immune from collateral attack. See Alamo Express, Inc. v. … The Commission has properly pursued a cause of action that is clearly granted by statute.

Elizabeth Callejo-Tolosa, M.D. v. Texas State Board of Medical Examiners

875 S.W.2d 762 · Texas Court of Appeals, 3rd District (Austin) · May 4, 1994

Tolosa contends that the Board erred by shifting the burden to her to establish the Board’s waiver criteria for rule 163.9(e). Dr. … Tolosa did not qualify for licen-sure based on her failure to meet the requirements prescribed in rule 163.9(c). This conclusion was clearly based on findings of fact eight through seventeen. Since Dr.

Ronald Joseph Frazier v. the State of Texas

Texas Court of Appeals, 3rd District (Austin) · Oct 20, 2023

We will reverse the trial court’s decision only if the trial court’s ruling was so clearly wrong as to lie outside the zone of reasonable disagreement. Id. … Establishing that the statement was “pertinent to treatment” requires a showing that it was reasonable for the health-care provider “to rely on the particular information contained in the statement in treating the declarant

Susan Combs, Successor to Carole Keeton Strayhorn, Comptroller of Public Accounts of the State of Texas And Greg Abbott, Attorney General of the State of Texas v. Chevron USA, Inc.

Texas Court of Appeals, 3rd District (Austin) · Apr 9, 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.

L.B. v. Texas Department of Family and Protective Services

Texas Court of Appeals, 3rd District (Austin) · Apr 9, 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.

the City of San Marcos, Texas v. Sam Brannon, Communities for Thriving Water-Flouride Free San Marcos, and Kathleen O'Connell

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

Here, the sole objective of Appellees’ Counterclaims was clearly and unambiguously an order for a special election to be conducted on November 3, 2015. … The number of these qualified signatures exceeded the requirements of section 9.004(a). Five percent of the number of qualified San Marcos voters is approximately 964. 36.

Wilmer-Hutchins Independent School District v. Lionel Meno, the Commissioner of Education, Central Education Agency, Thomas E. Anderson, Jr., Interim Commissioner of Education, and Bobby Williams

Texas Court of Appeals, 3rd District (Austin) · Jan 11, 1995

The standards for reviewing a motion for summary judgment are well established. … The statute clearly required the board to consider Williams' performance evaluation before it decided not to renew his contract.

Thomson v. Espey Huston & Associates, Inc.

899 S.W.2d 415 · Texas Court of Appeals, 3rd District (Austin) · May 24, 1995

We believe that an action for negligence in the performance of engineering services qualifies for application of the discovery rule. … Indeed, B & C Construction reaffirms the "clearly apparent” standard later in the same paragraph.

Cantu v. State

994 S.W.2d 721 · Texas Court of Appeals, 3rd District (Austin) · Jun 17, 1999

Here, the objection was that Story was not qualified as an expert to answer questions about various chemicals present in gunpowder. … In stating that Story could answer the question if he knew, the trial court implicitly overruled appellant’s objection that he was not qualified to answer the question.

Smith v. Lanier

998 S.W.2d 324 · Texas Court of Appeals, 3rd District (Austin) · Sep 10, 1999

Reid acted as a trustee over the community until such time as a qualified administrator (Lanier) was appointed. See Tex. … “Comity” is a principle under which the courts of one state give effect to the laws of another state or extend immunity to a sister sovereign not as a rule of law, but rather out of deference or respect. Hawsey v.

Glenn Hegar, Comptroller of Public Accounts of the State of Texas And Ken Paxton, Attorney General of the State of Texas v. Autohaus LP, LLP

Texas Court of Appeals, 3rd District (Austin) · Dec 14, 2015

sovereign or governmental immunity. … The following words and terms, when used in this section, shall have the following meanings, unless the context clearly indicates otherwise.

Pharmserv, Inc. v. Texas Health and Human Services Commission Office of the Inspector General of the Texas Health and Human Services Commission Kyle Janek, in His Official Capacity as Commissioner of Texas Health and Human Services Commission

Texas Court of Appeals, 3rd District (Austin) · May 13, 2015

It is clearly not restitution or repayment of inflated or false charges. … The Court of Appeals correctly notes that the UDJA does waive a governmental entity’s immunity for a declaration construing a statute, that 13 the UDJA waives sovereign immunity for

Antonio Perez v. the State of Texas

Texas Court of Appeals, 3rd District (Austin) · Mar 29, 2023

Under that standard, we will only reverse a trial court’s ruling if it is so clearly wrong as to lie outside “the zone of reasonable disagreement.” Lopez v. State, 86 S.W.3d 228, 230 (Tex. Crim. … However, the record establishes that he pleaded not guilty. Thus, we modify the judgment to reflect that Perez pleaded not guilty. See Tex. R. App.

Adam Biegel v. State

Texas Court of Appeals, 3rd District (Austin) · Aug 30, 2001

However, Fox, who testified after being granted use immunity, testified that she heard the victim say, “Do you just want my wallet?” and heard appellant respond “yes.” … 6 sufficient to produce the result and the conduct of the defendant clearly insufficient.”