Legal Opinion

in the Interest of S.A.P.

Texas Supreme Court

Decided January 21, 2005No. 04-0473PublishedCited by 29 opinions

1Per curiam

Based on a unanimous jury verdict, the trial court terminated the respondents’ parent-child relationship with S.A.P., their one-year-old son. Based on an estoppel defense that was neither pleaded nor submitted to the jury, a divided court of appeals reversed. 135 S.W.3d 165, 168-71. Because estoppel was not proved conclusively, we hold it was waived, and thus reverse.

S.A.P. was born on June 8, 2001 to Scott and Rebecca Peterson. 1 Viewing all the evidence in the light most favorable to the verdict, 2 both parents had a long history of involvement with child welfare agencies in New York and…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. In the Interest of J.F.C.Texas Supreme Court · 2002
  2. Johnson & Higgins of Texas, Inc. v. Kenneco Energy, Inc.Texas Supreme Court · 1998
  3. Boyles v. KerrTexas Supreme Court · 1993
  4. Phillips v. PhillipsTexas Supreme Court · 1992
  5. City of Hutchins v. PrasifkaTexas Supreme Court · 1970

3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by29 opinions

  1. In the Interest of S.A.P.Court of Appeals of Texas · 2005
  2. Hirschfeld Steel Co. v. Kellogg Brown & Root, Inc., Texas Court of Appeals, 14th District (Houston)2006
  3. In the Interest of J.M.Court of Appeals of Texas · 2005
  4. Williams v. County of Dallas, Texas Court of Appeals, 5th District (Dallas)2006
  5. B.C. v. Steak N Shake Operations, Inc.Court of Appeals of Texas · 2017

24 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API