Legal Opinion

In the Interest of Z.L.T.

Texas Supreme Court

Decided November 21, 2003No. 02-0474PublishedCited by 251 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtJustice O’Neill

In this case, we decide whether the trial court abused its discretion by implicitly denying a pro se inmate’s request for a bench warrant. We hold that it did not. Accordingly, we reverse the court of appeals’ judgment.

I

The Attorney General filed suit to establish the parent-child relationship between Thompson and three minor children. Thompson, who was incarcerated and proceeding pro se, filed an application for writ of habeas corpus ad testificandum, also known as a bench warrant, requesting permission to appear personally at pre-trial and trial hearings. The record does not reflect an…

2Cases cited13 opinions

  1. Hudson v. PalmerSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
  2. Lenz v. LenzTexas Supreme Court · 2002
  3. Acord v. General Motors Corp.Texas Supreme Court · 1984
  4. Jeff T. Stone v. Ernest E. Morris, Assistant Warden, Illinois State Penitentiary, Joliet Branch Segregation UnitCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1977
  5. Shull v. United Parcel Service, Texas Court of Appeals, 4th District (San Antonio)1999

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

3Cited by251 opinions

  1. in the Interest of D.S., N.S., Children, Texas Court of Appeals, 7th District (Amarillo)2011
  2. Hamilton v. PechacekCourt of Appeals of Texas · 2010
  3. Fewins v. State, Texas Court of Appeals, 10th District (Waco)2005
  4. Allen v. Rushing, Texas Court of Appeals, 6th District (Texarkana)2004
  5. in the Interest of L.N.C & K.N.M., Children, Texas Court of Appeals, 14th District (Houston)2019

246 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