Legal Opinion · Concurrence

Edwards Aquifer Authority v. Chemical Lime, Ltd.

Texas Supreme Court

Decided June 26, 2009No. 06-0911Published

1ConcurrenceJustice Brister

It has been said that “any law student, after a month in law school, knows that the *406answer to the question ‘Define X,’ is: ‘For what purpose are we defining this term?’ ”1 In this case, we must define “take effect” for the purpose of deciding when our judgments become the law, not when they become final. One would think judgments from this Court would become the law immediately. Indeed, there is no foreboding in the term “Judgment Day” if nothing happens until “Mandate Day.”

I agree with the Court that our decisions can take effect whenever we say they do. For example, in the school finance…

2Cases cited50 opinions

  1. State v. CullenCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 2006
  2. Duncan v. Cessna Aircraft Co.Texas Supreme Court · 1984
  3. Elbaor v. SmithTexas Supreme Court · 1993
  4. University of Texas Medical School at Houston v. ThanTexas Supreme Court · 1995
  5. State Farm Fire & Casualty Co. v. GandyTexas Supreme Court · 1996

45 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