Legal Opinion

Johnstone v. State

Texas Supreme Court

Decided March 9, 2000No. 99-0446PublishedCited by 86 opinions

1Per curiam

These consolidated cases present the question of whether a person appealing from a temporary mental health commitment order must comply with Texas Rule of Civil Procedure 324’s motion-for-new-trial requirement to complain about factual insufficiency on appeal. The Texas Rules of Civil Procedure apply generally to mental health commitment proceedings. However, when a rule of procedure conflicts with a statute, the statute prevails unless the rule has been passed subsequent to the statute and repeals the statute as provided by Texas Government Code section 22.004. See Kirkpatrick v. Hurst, 484…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. State v. LodgeTexas Supreme Court · 1980
  2. Few v. Charter Oak Fire Insurance CompanyTexas Supreme Court · 1971
  3. L.S. v. StateCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1993
  4. Moss v. StateCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1976
  5. State for the Best Interest & Protection of P.W.Court of Appeals of Texas · 1990

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

3Cited by86 opinions

  1. In the Interest of J.L.Texas Supreme Court · 2005
  2. in the Interest of D.W., T.W., and S.G., Children, Texas Court of Appeals, 2nd District (Fort Worth)2008
  3. Jackson v. State Office of Administrative HearingsTexas Supreme Court · 2011
  4. in Re Geomet Recycling LLC, Richard Goldberg, Kenneth Goldberg, Josh Applebaum, Alicia McKinney, Eloisa Medina, Lee Wakser, Spencer Lieman, Mikel Shecht, Laura Myers, Henry Jackson, and Kelly CouchTexas Supreme Court · 2019
  5. Villasan v. O'ROURKE, Texas Court of Appeals, 9th District (Beaumont)2005

81 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