Debra Chris Montgomery Kroupa Williams v. Wachovia Mortgage Corp, Robert W. Williams

How courts have described this case

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

• explaining that the appellant’s argument that section 50(a)(6)(A)’s consent requirement cannot be cured was undermined by the Texas Supreme Court’s broad pronouncement that “section 50(a)(6)(Q)(x) is a cure provision that applies to all of section 50(a
• dismissing arguments that 50(a)(6) provisions cannot be cured “[as] undermined by not only Priester but the Texas Supreme Court’s broad pronouncement in ... Doody that ‘section 50(a)(6)(Q)(x) is a cure provision that applies to all of section 50(a)’ ”
• “In Texas, when there is no express limitations period, the residual four-year statute of limitations described in section 16.051 of the Texas Civil Practice and Remedies Code applies.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).