In the Interest of S.A.P.
Court of Appeals of Texas
1DissentTom Gray, C.J.
This is another case in which this court creates and applies an artificial and unnecessary distinction between civil cases generally and a case involving termination of parental rights. The court’s earlier efforts to make such a distinction were rejected. In the Interest of B.L.D., 113 S.W.3d 340 (Tex.2003); In re AN, 113 S.W.3d 355 *172(Tex.2003); In the Interest of A.F., 113 S.W.3d 363 (Tex.2003); In the Interest of K.N.R., 113 S.W.3d 365 (Tex.2003); In the Interest of J.F.C., 96 S.W.3d 256 (Tex.2002). In doing this not only do we err, but we also do a disservice to the bench and bar by…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- In the Interest of J.F.C.Texas Supreme Court · 2002
- In the Interest of B.L.D.Texas Supreme Court · 2003
- Ackermann v. VordenbaumTexas Supreme Court · 1966
- Bradleys' Electric, Inc. v. Cigna Lloyds InsuranceTexas Supreme Court · 1999
- United Parcel Service, Inc. v. Cengis Tasdemiroglu, Texas Court of Appeals, 14th District (Houston)2000
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.