Texas Supreme Court· 2/24/1960
Deramus v. Thornton
Citations
- 333 S.W.2d 824
- 160 Tex. 494
- 3 Tex. Sup. Ct. J. 217
- 1960 Tex. LEXIS 566
How courts have described this case
Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.
- stating that there may be circumstances in some contempt proceedings that would make a remedy by habeas corpus inadequate, and that would therefore implicate mandamus relief
- stating that there may be circumstances in some contempt proceedings that would make a remedy by habeas corpus inadequate, and that would therefore implicate mandamus relief
- stating that conditions may arise in contempt matters in which a writ of habeas corpus would not be adequate and thus, mandamus relief would be the proper remedy
- holding habeas application premature where trial court had not yet acted to enforce contempt order, observing that “the presumption obtains that a judge will not attempt to enforce a void order and direct confinement thereunder”
- because the relator was not under restraint, an application for writ of habeas corpus would be premature
- The validity of a contempt judgment can be attacked only collaterally by a writ of habeas corpus
Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).
Judges: Smith, Culver
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCited by
90 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.
- Metzger v. SebekTex. App. Ct., 1st Dist. (Houston)· 1994-11-10· cited 438×
- In Re ReeceTexas Supreme Court· 2011-05-27· cited 330×
- Ex Parte ChambersTexas Supreme Court· 1995-06-15· cited 239×
- Ex Parte GonzalesCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas· 1997-05-12· cited 187×
- Ex Parte JohnsonTexas Supreme Court· 1983-07-06· cited 150×
- Ex Parte WilliamsTexas Supreme Court· 1985-04-24· cited 143×
- Rosser v. SquierTexas Supreme Court· 1995-06-29· cited 107×
- Donald A. Ridgway v. T.L. Baker, Potter County SheriffFifth Circuit· 1983-12-12· cited 105×
- In re FitzgeraldCourt of Appeals of Texas· 2014-04-30· cited 89×
- Ex Parte PayneCourt of Appeals of Texas· 1980-01-15· cited 61×
- Tracy v. TracyTex. App. Ct., 5th Dist. (Dallas)· 2007-03-19· cited 56×
- Dunn v. StreetTexas Supreme Court· 1997-01-31· cited 55×
- State v. Valmont PlantationsCourt of Appeals of Texas· 1961-03-29· cited 50×
- Ex Parte BarlowTex. App. Ct., 14th Dist. (Houston)· 1995-05-25· cited 46×
- In Re CornynTex. App. Ct., 1st Dist. (Houston)· 2000-09-07· cited 44×
- First National Bank of Giddings v. BirnbaumCourt of Appeals of Texas· 1992-04-01· cited 44×
- Ex Parte McIntyreTex. App. Ct., 4th Dist. (San Antonio)· 1987-04-30· cited 38×
- In Re Zenergy, Inc.Tex. App. Ct., 13th Dist.· 1997-12-11· cited 35×
- Sherrill v. Estate of PlumleyCourt of Appeals of Texas· 1974-06-06· cited 33×
- Ex Parte KruppsCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas· 1986-06-11· cited 31×
Cites
16 cases in this archive are cited by this case.
- Wagner v. WarnaschTexas Supreme Court· 1956-11-28· cited 288×
- Crane v. TunksTexas Supreme Court· 1959-10-28· cited 197×
- Van Dyke v. Superior CourtArizona Supreme Court· 1922-12-30· cited 52×
- Yett v. CookTexas Supreme Court· 1925-01-20· cited 47×
- Ex Parte ArapisTexas Supreme Court· 1957-11-20· cited 39×
- Ex Parte TwedellTexas Supreme Court· 1958-01-29· cited 36×
- City of Houston v. CampbellTexas Supreme Court· 1955-05-11· cited 34×
- Ex Parte WhiteTexas Supreme Court· 1955-01-19· cited 28×
- Yett v. CookTexas Supreme Court· 1926-02-03· cited 25×
- City of Houston v. AdamsTexas Supreme Court· 1955-05-11· cited 24×
- Tims v. TimsCourt of Appeals of Texas· 1947-10-13· cited 23×
- Ex Parte PalmateerTexas Supreme Court· 1951-10-31· cited 20×
- Ex Parte WilliamsTexas Supreme Court· 1960-01-06· cited 17×
- Ex Parte BethurumTexas Supreme Court· 1954-10-27· cited 12×
- Missouri-Kansas-Texas R. Co. v. Neuhoff Bros.Court of Appeals of Texas· 1956-10-19· cited 6×
- McCollum v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas· 1957-06-29· cited 6×
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.