Franka v. Velasquez

How courts have described this case

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

• rejecting defendant doctors’ position that it is sufficient to raise a fact issue on the could-have-been-brought prong of subsection (f) because of the potential result that plaintiff would be left without a remedy
• rejecting defendant doctors’ position that it is sufficient to raise a fact issue on the could-have-been-brought prong of subsection (f) because of the potential result that plaintiff would be left without a remedy
• rejecting defendant doctors = position that it is sufficient to raise a fact issue on the could-have-been-brought prong of subsection (f) because of the potential result that plaintiff would be left without a remedy
• “a trial court ... is not permitted to dismiss employees from a lawsuit under section 101.106(f) if a fact issue exists with regard to whether the governmental unit's immunity is waived”
• \a trial court . . . is not permitted to dismiss employees from a lawsuit under section 101.106(f) if a fact issue exists with regard to whether the governmental unit's immunity is waived\

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).