Upload a complaint or brief to quickly find on-point case law.
CARA A.I. uses the facts and legal issues in your document to find relevant authorities.
Drag a complaint or brief hereUpload a complaint or briefPDF documentWORD documentTXT documentOr, choose a document to uploadChoose DocumentSecure
Find on-point cases faster with CARA A.I.
§

Chauncey v. Kansas City, M. O. Ry. Co.

32 S.W.2d 369 (Tex. Civ. App. 1930)
Depth of Treatment
Newest to Oldest
Oldest to Newest
Cite Count
Chauncey v. Kansas City, M. O. Ry. Co.

1 Citing case

  1. State v. Plambeck

    Nos. 13-02-492-CR, 13-02-493-CR (Tex. App. Jun. 14, 2007)   Cited 1 times
    Conducting a de novo review on undisputed facts from witness testimony regarding the filing and dismissal of various indictments

    We review this error de novo. State v. McCoy, 64 S.W.3d 90, 91 (Tex.App.-Austin 2001, no pet.); State v. Sephus, 32 S.W.2d 369, 372 (Tex.App.-Waco 2001, pet. ref'd). In Smith and in Sanders the questions complained of appeared in the record and could be analyzed in relation to the testimony of other witnesses allowing the courts to "meaningfully gauge or quantify the effect of the error."