Skip to main content
· 10/24/2002

Dallas County v. Halsey

Citations

  • 87 S.W.3d 552
  • 46 Tex. Sup. Ct. J. 51
  • 2002 Tex. LEXIS 169
  • 2002 WL 31386080

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

  • recognizing that, when parties dispute contents of record, after notice and hearing, it is court's duty to order court reporter to correct any inaccuracies and certify corrected version
  • recognizing that, when parties dispute contents of record, after notice and hearing, it is court's duty to order court reporter to correct any inaccuracies and certify corrected version
  • recognizing that, when parties dispute contents of record, after notice and hearing, it is court's duty to order court reporter to correct any inaccuracies and certify corrected version
  • holding that “derived judicial immunity focuses on the nature of the function performed, not the identity of the actor, and considers whether the court officer’s conduct is like that of the delegating or appointing judge.“
  • concluding that court reporter was not entitled to derived judicial immunity
  • noting that in preparing record, court reporter does not participate in judicial decision making process and thus court reporter “cannot be construed as the functional equivalent of a judge”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Enoch, Hankinson

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.