Legal Opinion · Dissent

In the Interest of T.D.C.

Court of Appeals of Texas

Decided November 21, 2002No. 2-00-356-CVPublished

1DissentTerrie Livingston, Justice

I respectfully disagree with the majority’s conclusion that the evidence was factually insufficient to show that appointing Stoney as primary managing conservator would be a positive improvement for T.D.C. While the majority correctly sets forth the standard of review for factual sufficiency challenges and acknowledges the abuse-of-discretion standard for review on appeal of modification orders, I do not believe the majority correctly applied the abuse-of-discretion standard.

Factual Sufficiency and Abuse of Discretion

When considering a factual sufficiency challenge, a court of appeals must…

2Cases cited12 opinions

  1. Holley v. AdamsTexas Supreme Court · 1976
  2. Pool v. Ford Motor Co.Texas Supreme Court · 1986
  3. Maritime Overseas Corp. v. EllisTexas Supreme Court · 1998
  4. Worford v. StamperTexas Supreme Court · 1991
  5. Dupree v. Texas Department of Protective & Regulatory Services, Texas Court of Appeals, 5th District (Dallas)1995

7 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